K

They plan was to send them to Madagascar

No genocide

Why do you think that

Israel is mostly a dry and sandy...

Madagascar is a nice place

Most don't know about the Transfer Agreement.

Did it or did Germany merely start losing the war hence it was difficult to have non radical plans ?

Mass murder is bad yet its interesting how little coverage the situations in china Ukraine turkey get in comparison to this

Actually the entire governments of turkey and Japan deny genocide where as the Germans are apologetic ...

Anyway - I agree with you then original German plan was not gas chambers. I'm just adding they were desperate due to the war turning sour and didn't have the resources that they had when the Madagascar plan was devised

In the 1940s it wasn't too impressive, was it?

I don't think Madagascar was quite the barren wasteland you make it out to be.

Cause, in your own words, they have then less radical plan of moving them. Hoping not killing them.

As opposed to the extermination inbox Poland

Hitler didn't write much. It was penned by a catholic priest in his name.

Much of that is open to interpretation, being that Hitler clearly DID want to eliminate Jewry from Europe altogether and stated that plainly. Whenever specificity is brought about regarding that intention, his plan was always to be removal by planned emigration.

Wanting them hung by the hundreds in Munich isn't up for interpretation.

Well, it certainly is if it's based on the record of an interview only remembered 20 years following it's occurrence and well after the war's end by an anti-NSDAP journalist.

Well, what's true is the concentration camp system imprisoned many, many people, Jewish and otherwise, and many of them died, probably many were killed illicitly. Barring hard evidence of the actual logistics that supported the alleged extermination operation, a paper trail leading to its initiation, budget, infrastructure engineering, etc., or determinate forensic evidence that establishes the number claimed to have died at various sites, I reserve judgement on the issue only to say that I have extreme doubt about the veracity, and certainly about the level of confidence in the orthodox claims.

murdering

Following through with their orders to execute enemy and partisan operatives in hostile terrain, might be another way of saying this.

They tried to destroy all the paperwork

Citation needed.

First hand accounts

Many of them should be as they've proven bullshit. Others might be exaggerated or embellished. There might be some that are credible, which would be hard circumstantial evidence for illicit execution, but hardly provides substantiation for the entirety of the mainstream account of the Holocaust.

Why is it that whenever someone avoids MAXIMIZING the implications of Einsatzgruppen actions (or really any facet of the Holocaust looked at with a lens of scrutiny or doubt), then they are immediately seen as trying to MINIMIZE the implications of that activity.

Yes, the Einsatzgruppen killed many millions on the Eastern front, that includes Soviets and Jews alike, many belligerents engaging in combat as "partisan" militias (now lionized in retrospect, though they acted contrary to international law for warfare at the time). The activities of these groups and their association with local Jews are well known and even depicted in a Hollywood film entitled "Defiance" and starring Daniel Craig, in which he plays a Jew fighting alongside partisans. Many of the Jews executed on the Eastern front were found to be cooperating with partisan militias, just like what is seen in the movie.

Is it possible that some "innocent Jews" were killed, perhaps illicitly, by Einsatzgruppen in the USSR? Sure, it's very possible. Should every single Jewish life lost in the fray of combat on that front be included as another casualty of an alleged but largely undocumented genocidal extermination program ordered from the central Nazi command structure? I don't know, you tell me. Keep in mind, the only way to arrive at the popular "6 million figure" is to do just that, and then some.

As for the assertion of "hundreds of first hand accounts of gassings," well, frankly, I doubt you can point to hundreds or even dozens. And yes, it would be nothing but a matter of course for Soviet Communists to manufacture such testimonies in order to whitewash their own crimes throughout the previous three decades and during the war.

Mosty gassed guys in trucks

Well I'm not trying to go against what you said because I don't understand it because the main point is a sentence fragment.

You try to talk about the holocaust here you get mass downvoted with little discussion, as with most of history the holocaust was exaggerated. To what extent? Hard to say with all the disinformation flying about

I talked to a guy who denies the Holocaust.

He was uninformed about the mainstream position on the Holocaust.

Therefore the mainstream position on the Holocaust is accurate.

LOL. Uh huh.

I don't know whom you are referring to but it doesn't make the mainstream narratives any more credible that one person you know is ignorant of their details. In fact, one wouldn't even have to know the minutiae of all theories about something to disprove some of them.

Keeping in mind that I'm not defending someone whom I don't know and only offering hypothetical analysis of the scenario...

Who cares? If he can evidence his claims or has an alternative explanatory model, then he can validate his position.

Or maybe he is just creating a strawman and therefore arguing from logical fallacy. It's not as if Holocaust "deniers" are exclusively guilty of this. Michael Shermer uses strawman logical fallacy to argue against not only Holocaust "denial" but myriad topics on almost every occasion.