Page 3 of 3
Re: Is this statement from bombs accurate?
Posted: Fri Feb 14, 2025 6:20 pm
by Stubble
HansHill wrote: ↑Fri Feb 14, 2025 6:15 pm
bombsaway wrote: ↑Fri Feb 14, 2025 6:07 pm
Show me something like this for another method of killing if your claim is that is what historians believe.
Mr stubble is right and all of this belongs in a new thread. I invite a mod to clip the thread from any of my posts, into a new thread!
So BA, you are tacitly inferring that the Allied nations brought forth charges against the Nation of Germany they knew were a) unsubstantiated, b) likely to be false, and c) men were hung for this.
That's great progress and I'm glad we can agree on this. Now with all of the above clearly in focus, why should I trust their Zyklon B claims?
Thank you Mr Hill. Had I the power I'd split it, we are about to go on a really wild ride if we take this course. Rather than opening a new thread, I see merit in splitting this one and I apologize to the moderation team for the creation of new work.
Re: Is this statement from bombs accurate?
Posted: Fri Feb 14, 2025 6:22 pm
by bombsaway
HansHill wrote: ↑Fri Feb 14, 2025 6:15 pm
So BA, you are tacitly inferring is that the Allied nations brought forth charges against the Nation of Germany they knew were a) unsubstantiated, b) likely to be false, and c) men were hung for this.
A) maybe they knew yes
B) this is a stretch. they probably just didn't care enough to vet them. Jews were not a priority. Accuracy was not a priority. This is something they can be criticized for, esp the Soviets.
C) I don't think anyone was hung solely on the basis of secondary sources or rumors like this, but you're free to show this to me
No Germans were even hung by the Soviets for "doing Katyn".
Allies can be criticized for pushing unsubstantiated narratives to the extent these narratives were unsubstantiated.
Historians operate under a different model.
If you're going to criticize a narrative, it seems like a sign of weakness to not focus on the most well corroborated, evidenced aspects, rather ones that no historians take seriously.
Re: Is this statement from bombs accurate?
Posted: Fri Feb 14, 2025 6:45 pm
by HansHill
bombsaway wrote: ↑Fri Feb 14, 2025 6:22 pm
If you're going to criticize a narrative, it seems like a sign of weakness to not focus on the most well corroborated, evidenced aspects, rather ones that no historians take seriously.
I have commented on the lack of HcN residues extensively, thank you.
Re: Is this statement from bombs accurate?
Posted: Fri Feb 14, 2025 6:52 pm
by Stubble
Absurdity isn't my drive or focus, but I'm not going to ignore it for the sake of convince to the orthodoxy.
When I look at the narrative I look at the whole thing, not just the included threads.
How are you going to be able to take in a tapestry if you look at its constituent threads in isolation?
Re: Is this statement from bombs accurate?
Posted: Fri Feb 14, 2025 10:42 pm
by curioussoul
Stubble wrote: ↑Fri Feb 14, 2025 3:17 pmThe bolded part. I slept better when I thought the missing jews had been seamlessly just folded in to populations here or there all over the eastern front, vast as it was.
I think I'm starting to get a clearer picture of the reality of the situation. It ain't pretty.
I mean, the Eastern Jews, especially from countries like Poland, probably to some extent did fold into the general populations of the Soviet Union in the years and decades after the war.
Re: Is this statement from bombs accurate?
Posted: Fri Feb 14, 2025 11:10 pm
by Stubble
curioussoul wrote: ↑Fri Feb 14, 2025 10:42 pm
Stubble wrote: ↑Fri Feb 14, 2025 3:17 pmThe bolded part. I slept better when I thought the missing jews had been seamlessly just folded in to populations here or there all over the eastern front, vast as it was.
I think I'm starting to get a clearer picture of the reality of the situation. It ain't pretty.
I mean, the Eastern Jews, especially from countries like Poland, probably to some extent did fold into the general populations of the Soviet Union in the years and decades after the war.
Fair, but probably not out of the subset I'm expressing inquiry over the disposition of. Which I find both uncomfortable and unfortunate.
Re: Is this statement from bombs accurate?
Posted: Fri Feb 14, 2025 11:13 pm
by curioussoul
Stubble wrote: ↑Fri Feb 14, 2025 11:10 pm
curioussoul wrote: ↑Fri Feb 14, 2025 10:42 pm
Stubble wrote: ↑Fri Feb 14, 2025 3:17 pmThe bolded part. I slept better when I thought the missing jews had been seamlessly just folded in to populations here or there all over the eastern front, vast as it was.
I think I'm starting to get a clearer picture of the reality of the situation. It ain't pretty.
I mean, the Eastern Jews, especially from countries like Poland, probably to some extent did fold into the general populations of the Soviet Union in the years and decades after the war.
Fair, but probably not out of the subset I'm expressing inquiry over the disposition of. Which I find both uncomfortable and unfortunate.
Which subset are you referring to?
Re: Is this statement from bombs accurate?
Posted: Fri Feb 14, 2025 11:26 pm
by Stubble
curioussoul wrote: ↑Fri Feb 14, 2025 11:13 pm
Stubble wrote: ↑Fri Feb 14, 2025 11:10 pm
curioussoul wrote: ↑Fri Feb 14, 2025 10:42 pm
I mean, the Eastern Jews, especially from countries like Poland, probably to some extent did fold into the general populations of the Soviet Union in the years and decades after the war.
Fair, but probably not out of the subset I'm expressing inquiry over the disposition of. Which I find both uncomfortable and unfortunate.
Which subset are you referring to?
'Transited east' through operation Reinhardt.