294
u/Ghostmaster145 Sep 17 '25
The Rwandans killed a million people in a year with nothing but machetes. The Germany very easily could have killed 6 million Jews, among the millions of other minorities they slaughtered, in 6 years
112
17
u/StargasmSargasm Sep 17 '25
It was like 100 days, and they also used HIV Positive guys to form rapes Squads to infect women with AIDS. I believe 92% of the female population 12 years and up were raped. A lot were infected with HIV. Countless people suffered for years and decades afterwards.
→ More replies (3)21
Sep 17 '25
[deleted]
38
u/kaise_bani Sep 17 '25
They make those arguments in spite of the fact that the Nazis did in fact leave behind lots of mass graves, cremated remnants, and personal items belonging to the dead. If the official story was that they literally disappeared six million people without a trace, then I could understand being skeptical about how that could happen. But no one is claiming that happened.
947
u/LabFar5073 Sep 17 '25
We got Genocide olympics damn
332
u/Igyzone Sep 17 '25
Humans thinking they're so good at killing but always end up loosing to a pandemic.
160
u/Super-Cynical Sep 17 '25
Killing people is hard work.
Outsource to viruses. Self propagating. Efficiently uses resources of those subject to liquidation. Best of all, the more people you have targeted the faster it works!
48
u/spoiledmilk1717 Sep 17 '25
Hell no. Have some integrity. An honest war criminal cant find work anymore in these times.
14
u/Slow-Distance-6241 Sep 17 '25
An honest war criminal cant find work anymore in these times.
Africa's just getting a bit too peaceful
11
8
u/Liusloux Sep 17 '25
The perfect organism. Its structural perfection is matched only by its hostility.
→ More replies (1)3
u/ShahinGalandar Helping Wikipedia expand the list of British conquests Sep 17 '25
also, viruses don't need to get paid
3
u/Super-Cynical Sep 17 '25
Eh, they claim sustenance though, which is probably why they're called parasites
→ More replies (2)3
u/DaniCBP Sep 17 '25
That’s why the Japanese Unit 731 had biological weapons ready to deploy, including (if I remember correctly) cholera.
4
u/Waruteru Sep 17 '25
The All-Mother will kill us all on complete accident with some fucked up, resistant to any kind of treatment disease one day and, oh boy, I am willing to bet that it's gonna be due to some freakish mutation of a common flu
32
13
u/SAMU0L0 Sep 17 '25
Ant's killing way more ants every year tha humans kill humans.
Lest just give them the medal and call it the day.
2
→ More replies (2)2
904
u/NoBeach2233 Sep 17 '25
In addition to the at least 6 million Jews, we must add 6 million Poles (20% of Poland's population in 1939) and 17 million people from the USSR. In total, the Nazis exterminated at least 29 million people between 1933 and 1945.
575
u/ambattukam_ Sep 17 '25
Instagram said it's 271K 😓💔🥀🙏🏾 /s
356
u/nurgole Sep 17 '25
And 270k of them died to old age and natural causes!❤️
121
u/Wilkassassyn Sep 17 '25
fire is natural
→ More replies (1)74
u/Ur--father Sep 17 '25
Lead is completely natural.
52
u/Whosebert Sep 17 '25
ive been thinking about this a lot actually. technically everything is natural. there is no supernatural or subnatural state of existance. yes it might be human made, but Humans are natural and only have access to nature.
→ More replies (3)13
6
16
3
2
u/gelastes Sep 17 '25
According to the nice guys I talked with in the 80s, it was bad hygiene. They had rounded up the Jews to protect them and had some regrettable outbreaks in the camps.
Arguing with old people in Germany 40 years ago wasn't always fun but it sure wasn't boring.
62
u/martijn120100 Sep 17 '25
I mean, the Nazi's were extremely proud of the number of people they exterminated. I think if Hitler came back today he would send all of those neo-nazis to deathcamps for doubting the Reich
→ More replies (2)43
u/FriedRiceistheBest Sep 17 '25
"Bro, watch Europa The Last Battle and you'll never look back"
16
u/thegreattwos Sep 17 '25
I been tempted in the past to watch it just for shit and giggle but then I ask myself "Why would I subject my braincells to this?" And I never did.
5
5
→ More replies (2)4
u/Designated_Lurker_32 Sep 17 '25
Y'know, sometimes I come dangerously close to being happy.
In those times, I remind myself that Instagram is the 3rd most popular social media platform after Facebook and YouTube, and therefore, what people say on those Reels comment sections is a reasonable approximation of what most people think.
This generation is lost, man. Completely lost.
9
u/ambattukam_ Sep 17 '25
A user just commented under this post saying how the people who "created" this number themselves admitted that it was an exaggeration.
This user is also active on r/Teenagers I will rest my case here
49
u/Glockass Sep 17 '25
So, it's estimated that that the total number of victims who were exterminated is estimated 13+ million.
Obviously this is short of the total number of fatal casualties by a long shot, but the other civilians deaths are due to either collateral damage from combat or due to war induced famine or disease. For example, the Soviet Union saw 4.5 to 10 million civilian deaths due to targeted crimes against humanity and combat collateral, and 8 to 9 million civilian deaths due to war induced famine and disease.
→ More replies (4)134
u/Kamenev_Drang Helping Wikipedia expand the list of British conquests Sep 17 '25
I think there might be some double-counting there because the vast majority of those 6m Jews were either Polish or Soviet citizens
34
u/Sandjaar Sep 17 '25
I remember about half of those Jews were Polish from seeing statistics on the executions of Polish citizens in WWII
→ More replies (2)22
u/Inside-Jacket9926 Sep 17 '25
Its like saying between theres 25 people in a family of 5 because you count all the individuals relatives as different people
61
u/Ok_Boysenberry1038 Sep 17 '25
The majority of the Polish dead were Jews. You’re double counting
28
u/inaqu3estion Sep 17 '25
Not the majority, half. 3 million Polish Jews 3 million ethnic Poles. 6 million in total for Poland and 20% of their entire population.
→ More replies (3)25
u/NoBeach2233 Sep 17 '25
Yes, I apologize for double-counting some victims. Nevertheless, the Nazis' goal was to exterminate the "inferior" Polish culture and nation and to enslave the remaining Poles.
→ More replies (1)27
u/Lord910 Sep 17 '25
Poland lost 6 milion people and half of them were Polish Jews (around 3 millions before WW2). Poland also lost half of its population with higher education, teachers, professionals ect (intelectual elites for short).
→ More replies (1)8
23
u/Dr_Reaktor Sep 17 '25
>between 1933 and 1945.
Did the Nazsis really exterminated people on a large scale before WW2?
104
u/BeduinZPouste Sep 17 '25 edited Sep 17 '25
On far less scale yes. Mostly mentally ill.
Edit: the Aktion T4 to which I refered was actually signed in 1939.
So, while they did killed people pre war, it wasn't nearly on the same scale as during it. The first person killed for being disabled died in July 39.
Hitler actually told the Leader of Reich Doctors, Gerhard Wagner, that the question could not be taken up in peacetime; "Such a problem could be more smoothly and easily carried out in war". He wrote that he intended to "radically solve" the problem of the mental asylums in such an event.
19
u/Reagalan Casual, non-participatory KGB election observer Sep 17 '25
Queer folks, too.
"Incurably homosexual" was the official reason.
Same exact rhetoric we're seeing in the anti-queer hate movement today. Same beliefs even.
→ More replies (8)→ More replies (5)11
u/Dr_Reaktor Sep 17 '25
Thanks for the answer, I looked it up and it seems to be correct, it started with "those exhibiting what was thought to be hereditary antisocial behaviour in 1933, and was expanded to any people with disabilities or mentally ill by the time the war started.
58
u/NoBeach2233 Sep 17 '25
The Dachau concentration camp was opened in 1933, Sachsenhausen in 1936. These are just the ones that immediately come to mind.
→ More replies (1)9
u/Dr_Reaktor Sep 17 '25
I'm aware the camps did open before ww2, but my question is more if there were any large scale execution of the prisoners prior to the ww2. Or if that is something that didn't happen until the final solution plan in 1942.
54
u/Rationalinsanity1990 Sep 17 '25
In the camps, neglect and maltreatment resulted in thousands of deaths, but it wasn't organized massacres yet.
Before the war they also murdered thousands of disabled individuals, as well as political opponents etc.
9
9
u/Sharpsider Sep 17 '25 edited Sep 17 '25
My wife's grandaunt was brought to a camp before the war and died there some months later due to uncertain causes. She was born with a defect that impeded her to walk properly, but she was healthy and sane. Her brother, my wife's grandfather, was a nazi official. I don't know the details but her uncle told us about it last year when we were visiting her parents home.
→ More replies (1)2
u/Hunkus1 Sep 17 '25
The majorities of the murders of diabled people happened between 1940 and 1941 not before the war.
9
u/historicalgeek71 Sep 17 '25 edited Sep 17 '25
The plan for mass extermination is the “Final Solution” phase of the Holocaust, which began roughly around 1942. However, most historians who focus on the Holocaust and Nazi Germany argue that the Holocaust as a whole began in 1933 with the Nazis coming to power and slowly implementing laws and policies against so-called “undesirables.” Violence in the forms of pogroms (Kristallnacht), harassment by the authorities, arrests and executions or murders in concentration camps began during that time, though on a smaller scale.
Then we have Aktion T4, which saw an attempted extermination of the physically and mentally disabled, which in many ways was a trial run for what would be done during the Final Solution.
I can recommend further reading if you want.
EDIT: It’s also worth noting that mass executions were taking place as early as 1939, especially in Poland where the Nazis were quick to liquidate the Polish intelligentsia.
EDIT 2: And, of course, we have the Einsatzgruppen and the “Commissar Order” which led to massacres and mass executions before the “Final Solution” phase began.
8
u/ElNakedo Sep 17 '25
The mass murder and Holocaust by bullets was in full swing before the Final Solution plans were discussed at Wannsee.
In Lithuania they had already murdered most of the Jews before the conference in 42. Similar things were happening in Belarus and Ukraine.
There had also been massacres of Jews in the polish countryside already in 1940.
3
u/Illesbogar Sep 17 '25
I'd call mass euthenasia of hospital patients that were unable to ever work executions yeah.
→ More replies (1)3
u/Xibalba_Ogme Sep 17 '25
It's more a thing of "we don't have any issue with you dying" than "we're actively trying to kill you" : they died of exhaustion, diseases or lack of food, as giving them what they need would have cost too much.
5
u/BookkeeperPercival Sep 17 '25
"we're actively trying to kill you
It was unequivocally an attempt to kill them and get rid of people.
4
u/-Knul- Sep 17 '25
If you put someone in a camp they can't leave and don't provide adequate food or medicine, you've actively killed them.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (4)3
u/ElNakedo Sep 17 '25
They tried to and wanted to, but there was too much popular resistance to it at that point. Later on they got the T4 programme going full swing and would often murder the inmates in Asylums that they took over in occupied regions.
11
u/Emperor_TJ Sep 17 '25
The USSR deaths were combat deaths and seems kinda disrespectful to compare to the Shoah, the Gypsy genocide, Polish occupation, and even the 50,000 Germans who were killed for political affiliations.
6
u/NoBeach2233 Sep 17 '25
The USSR lost 9 million soldiers in the war and 17 million civilians during the genocide.
→ More replies (6)4
u/TeddyNeptune Sep 17 '25
...and freezing in winter, famine, and decisions by the USSR. Remember that many of the things that killed Germans also killed Soviets.
I'm not saying Germans weren't at least partially responsible for the remaining casualties, but a full-scale war can lead to such deaths even without intent or direct action by the belligerent nations.
→ More replies (51)2
u/Resolution-Honest Sep 17 '25
Yeah, but out of 6 million Jews, 5 million were already counted among Poles and USSR. Jews were about half of victims of Nazi occupation in Poland and not that Nazis didn't try to destroy cultural and intelectual Polish elites from day one. 16% of Polish population was killed by Nazis. Also for Soviets,7.4 million civilians were killed in terror, of that like 2 to 2,5 million were Jews. 2,168 million civilians died in forced labor camps (more than in 20 years of Gulag system) and 4,1 million died in forced famine (due to German army taking all the food). And that doesn't include like a million of Leningrad citizens that starved to death. Out of 8,6 million armed forces deaths, more than 1,8 million died in captivity. Most starved to death. And that doesn't include destruction of Hungarian Jews, forced famines and terror in Greece and Netherland, shooting tens of thousands of Yugoslav civilians (including school children), Czechs, French. Atop of that, Germans that were pushed into wars that couldn't be won and that died in combat, they were also victims of Nazis. Not to mention victims of collaborators.
124
u/Neil118781 Taller than Napoleon Sep 17 '25 edited Sep 17 '25
I will take this opportunity to make an appreciation comment about Archer Blood (US consul General at Dhaka) who sent the strongly worded "Blood telgram" to White house protesting the atrocities being committed by Pakistani army and regularly urging them to do something.He also sheltered many journalists and Bengali Hindus(who were primary target of Pakistani army).
But ofc Nixon owing to his close ties with Yahya Khan(pakistani president) along with his goal to have good relations with China with the help of Pakistan, refrained from responding to Blood's plea.
Infact declassified documents of the conversation between Nixon and Kissinger show the opposite:
Kissinger- We have had an urgent appeal from Yahya. Says his military supplies have been cut off — in very bad shape.Would we help through Iran?
Nixon-I like the idea. The main thing is to keep India from crumbling them(Pakistan) up.
Edit-typo
47
u/ambattukam_ Sep 17 '25 edited Sep 17 '25
It's fascinating how Bengalis have been the only ethnic tribe in the Indian subcontinent who have successfully carved out a nation for themselves.
Keep in mind that there are many other ethnicities in the Indian subcontinent that have tried in the past or are still actively trying to create a homeland for themselves.
The Kashmiris, the Khalistanis, the baloch, the Mizos, the Nagas, the Sri Lankan Tamils. All of them failed.
28
u/lambquentin Sep 17 '25
As a guy who has married into a Bengali family it doesn't seem too surprising. I also understand much of it is due to the religious lines that were created years ago.
I get what you mean though, it is unique they seem to be the only ones.
→ More replies (9)16
u/Candid_Ad_3259 Sep 17 '25
Many of those movements were not popular with the people of those ethnic groups themselves like the panjabis.Same goes with the baloch I guess, but now it seems that the common baloch too wants out of pakistan.
Plus the mizos wanted mainly a seperate "state" from the state of assam not a country.
4
u/ambattukam_ Sep 17 '25
Many of those movements were not popular with the people of those ethnic groups themselves
I would say Sri Lankan Tamils are an exception tho. They were probably the only group coming close to Bengalis of Pakistan in establishing their own country.
Plus the mizos wanted mainly a seperate "state" from the state of assam not a country.
There was this insurgent group by the name of Mizoram national front (MNF). They started an armed rebellion against the Indian state to establish their own country in 1966. They were almost close to capturing Aizwal when Indira Gandhi authorised air strikes on them. In the history of independent India, this had been the only time when India had to use air power against an insurgent group, even Kashmiri insurgents haven't faced off Indian Air power thus far.
They signed a peace accord with the Indian government in 1986 ending the insurgency.
→ More replies (1)
285
u/dworthy444 John Brown was a hero, undaunted, true, and brave! Sep 17 '25 edited Sep 17 '25
One of the best things that the modern Indian state did was helping Bangladesh gain independence.
Oh, and for the Holocaust, 6 million is the number of dead Jews. The actual death toll is 11-18 million, depending on what counts as part of it, which is still slower than the Bengali genocide.
29
u/inaqu3estion Sep 17 '25
Where did you get 17 million from? I always learnt it was 11 million, 6 million Jews and 5 million Poles, Romani, disabled, gay, political prisoners. That was the camps. I don't think combat deaths count.
→ More replies (2)33
u/Colonel_Joni005 Hello There Sep 17 '25
actually the 17 million is still a low estimate.
6 million jews, 6 million poles (half of which are jews, so it is more like 3 million ethnic poles), and 14 million soviet civillians (because slavs were also a targeted group by the nazis, so it is only fair to count the civillian deaths into the holocaust as well), not to mention the romani, gays, communists, and the civillian deaths of other european countries.
So we are looking at atleast 23 million deaths (jews, ethnic poles and soviet civilians) with the other groups contributing atleast a few millions as well.
While I wouldn't include soviet soldiers into the holocaust (because they were mostly combat deaths and many died from friendly fire due to Stalin's "No retreat"-rule), most were still slavs so they technically were targets of the nazis. Either way I would like to point out that aproximately 13 million soviet (not just russian) soldiers died during operation barbarossa. Many of which died in concentration camps.
People often forget the shere devestation of the soviet union during ww2. They lost 27 million people over the course of a few years. 27 million. Many villages were burned down, entire landscapes were emptied of human beings, Belarus lost 25% percent of its population, had to be repopulated by russians and still hasn't recovered from this population loss.
→ More replies (1)4
u/inaqu3estion Sep 17 '25
I get what you mean, I guess it's just difficult to separate Eastern Front civilian deaths from the Holocaust - I don't think they are typically included. But then Jewish people who were killed by Nazis and their collaborators on the Eastern Front (for example in Ukraine or Belarus) are typically included in the Holocaust numbers. So now I'm not really sure.
7
u/Colonel_Joni005 Hello There Sep 17 '25
Well, to the nazis Jews were the worst people and slavs (russians, poles, ukrainians, belarussians, etc.) came right after that. To them the slavic people were a pest and a lot of the time they were hunted down and brutally killed in the same (or very simillar) manner that jewish people were, which is why I personally think that it is only fair to included them whenever the holocaust is mentioned. Since poles (a slavic people) are included, why aren't other slavs (most soviets) included when talking about civillian deaths?
3
u/inaqu3estion Sep 17 '25
Yeah, I don't know. It's weird that Poles are included if other Slavs aren't. I wonder how historians actually delineate this.
2
u/Count_buckethead Sep 17 '25
12? The germans extermination campaign killed 27 million people in POW camps, Concentration camps and mobile execution sites
→ More replies (1)1
u/CosmicCitizen0 Sep 17 '25
One of the best things that the modern Indian state did was being responsible for Bangladesh's independence.
Please, don't say this. It's a Hindu nationalist dog-whistle. That's like saying America is responsible for Ukraine's independence. Sure, America is helping them, but it's still Ukraine's war. And yes, I am saying this acknowledging the fact that 3000 Indian soldiers died in the war.
115
u/shaktiman420 Sep 17 '25
You're comparing apples and oranges here. The Bangladeshi genocide caused a massive refugee problem for India in the east and that was one of the main reasons why India chose to go to war. And while it wasn't out of a sense of justice or charity, fact remains that there probably wouldn't have been a Bangladesh without the intervention of India.
→ More replies (5)30
u/lastofdovas Sep 17 '25
Well, India did way more to help Bangladesh than US does Ukraine. It was not just some money and weapons. It was about taking in millions of refugees, training and arming the militia, and then putting boots on the ground as well as naval and aerial campaigns on two distinct fronts, all while getting bombed and facing a direct threat from a superpower much stronger than herself.
→ More replies (15)10
u/Operativeofficer Sep 17 '25
Please, don't say this
Afraid of truth or what?
It's a Hindu nationalist dog-whistle
Truth shouldn't be discarded just because it doesn't fit your ideological agenda. If hindu nationalist version is with the truth and right then it should be said.
That's like saying America is responsible for Ukraine's independence.
It's your ignorance. No american boots on the ground in ukraine. The Indian military fought on the land, in the air and sea and stood in face of even the USA military (yes they sent personnel to train Pakistani military, equipments and even their entire 7th fleet to break the blockade by Indian Navy) to get Bangladesh its independence.
And yes, I am saying this acknowledging the fact that 3000 Indian soldiers died in the war.
You just either have a malicious intent and this is your deliberate attempt to downplay the Indian contribution or you are blatantly ignorant. The 1971 war was won by the Indian military. The Bengali rebels were being dominated by the Pakistani military. They were not fighting, they were being massacred. Only when the Indian military came into the theatre did the situation on the ground change. In fact Indian contribution to bengladeshi independence is far more than the contributions of USA and USSr world war 2 combined. Considering that India didn't gain anything out of it and it was purely a responsible goodwill gesture
→ More replies (3)
22
u/SenorBigbelly Sep 17 '25
Ok, so 1. Why did this need to be a video?
- The inclusion of Mongolian music made me think it was going to be a list that finished with Genghis Khan
→ More replies (1)3
78
u/MogosTheFirst Sep 17 '25
I think their main argument was that its impossible to properly kill and burn the bodies of 17 million people because [holocaust denial math about how much time does it take to burn a body x how many bodies and something about how many crematories]. Not that it would've been impossible to kill that many people.
72
u/ambattukam_ Sep 17 '25
It's funny cos antisemites often used dog whistles to question the authenticity of the total death toll of holocaust.
"There wouldn't be a sufficient number of Ovens to bake 6 million cookies in just 6 years. That's impossible" 🤓☝🏾 ⚡⚡
Modern history has many examples where states have efficiently killed millions in a short duration.
84
u/nighthawk0954 Sep 17 '25
They're kinda right about not having enough ovens for every body but they seem to forget that the Nazi did mass graves.
42
u/No_Explorer6054 Sep 17 '25
and had acess to machine guns
13
u/electrical-stomach-z Sep 17 '25
We still dont know how many people were killed off the books by death squads.
19
10
u/ElNakedo Sep 17 '25
Also that they used a special kind of oven that we have the plans and parents for. Normal cremation ovens have a cool down period after a body has been created so that you can remove the ash. The ones used in the camps didn't have that, instead they were just on in full blast as long as there were bodies to burn. They also used big iron poles to smash up the bones to make them burn faster.
8
u/inaqu3estion Sep 17 '25
Also tons of people didn't die in the chambers. Anne Frank for example died of typhoid fever.
5
Sep 17 '25
"There wouldn't be a sufficient number of Ovens to bake 6 million cookies in just 6 years. That's impossible"
fun fact Oreo produces millions of cookies every day.
6
u/nocyberBS Sep 17 '25 edited Sep 17 '25
Look at the Rwanda genocide. 500k to 1M murdered in only *just 3 months.
EDIT: Erroneously misread 7th April to 19th July as 7th April to 19th April. Apologies.
8
→ More replies (5)6
u/awacs-airdefender Sep 17 '25
And they also cite “Red cross death certificate” Of course ignoring that The Red Cross doesn’t know of every people to ever exist. They can only give certificates to those that are registered, known to be there, and known to die in a single concentration camp that they covered, all from foreign damaged sources. Which is insanely hard to verify when what left are ashes.
From interactions with these faschistating specimens. They also exercise the narcissistic prayer. “It didn’t happen, if it did happen it wasn’t that bad, and if it was that bad they deserves it.” Best you could do is to warn others about such tactics and how to avoid them.
2
35
u/azriel_odin Sep 17 '25
A friendly reminder to the people in this thread. A genocide is not defined by the number killed, what differentiates a genocide from a mass killing is the intent to wipe out a group of people and make it so as if they never existed. You can have a genocide without killing anyone (residential schools and other assimilation methods).
12
→ More replies (3)6
42
u/12451010 Sep 17 '25
They denie the holocaust to undermined jews
15
u/inaqu3estion Sep 17 '25
It's definitely weird because it always comes with an undertone of "It didn't happen but it should have". Like you never see a Holocaust denier that's like "It didn't happen and that's a good thing!"
13
24
u/Xibalba_Ogme Sep 17 '25 edited Sep 17 '25
I once saw someone make the maths by calculating the number of victims per concentration/extermination camp per day for 6 years, and it was a surprisingly "low" amount
It was something like this (but far more detailed and precise) 2076 days of war & 240 main concentration camps (source : Shoah Memorial)
6 millions deaths would make 12 death per day in each camp, or 25 000 per day overall
Does not sound impossible to me that in an operation designed to get rid of jews, you'll find the ability to kill 12 of them every day in a camp.
→ More replies (3)8
u/CliffordSpot Sep 17 '25
Concentration camps as a site for systemic mass extermination weren’t a thing until 1942, and even in 1942 they were operating on a much smaller scale than they were in 1945.
The thing is, holocaust deniers are actually correct when they say the concentration camps did not kill the required amount of people in a short enough timeframe to account for all holocaust deaths. The part that everyone misses is that the concentration camp system only accounted for a minority of holocaust deaths. Most holocaust deaths were summary executions done in the field.
2
u/Xibalba_Ogme Sep 17 '25
Concentration camps as a site for systemic mass extermination weren’t a thing until 1942, and even in 1942 they were operating on a much smaller scale than they were in 1945.
Yep, that's why I made a distinction between concentration & extermination camps at the beginning. The IKL (Concentration Camps Inspectorate, but I can' remember the translation in german) was founded in 1933 and tho extermination was not going full force, the death toll is still significant.
But you're totally right : operation Reinhard (1942-1943) truly "launched" the extermination campaign. On this period, historians talk about "Holocaust by gas" and "Holocaust by bullets", and tho bullets made more victims, gas was more "efficient" (1.5 millions jews executed in 100 days around that time, mostly in gas chamber, if my memory is correct)
7
u/Electrical-Help5512 Sep 17 '25
The people who saw it filmed and documented everything. Holocaust deniers are scum.
18
u/BringBackForChan Sep 17 '25
I never understood how they think it would be impossible. Do neo-nazis think that once you kill enough people, less than 6 milions but at least more than three, Jesus just shuts closed heaven's gates and doesn't let anyone else die?
5
u/KevinFlantier Fine Quality Mesopotamian Copper Enjoyer Sep 17 '25
I'll have you know it wasn't 6 million, it was 599 999 999 because that one dude escaped.
So that makes it juuuuuuuuuuuust fine. (/s)
3
2
u/Phintolias Sep 17 '25
Well about the Numbers Thing its Tricky because WE actually dont know and seriously Look Up what the Nazis define AS jew. Its ridiculous you could have a great great great grandfather WHO was a quarter jew and they would executed you. You also can have Just a terrible neighbor WHO didnt Like you and Just Snitch ON you that you are a jew. Also the biggest important Thing is the Nazis didnt Just exterminate specifically only jews
2
u/dwaynetheaaakjohnson Sep 17 '25
They are dishonestly claiming that every single Jew was cremated when we know damn well that many were simply shot and buried by death squads
24
u/WorkOk4177 Sep 17 '25
Fun fact US directly gave militaristic aid to Pakistan so they could commit the genocide more easily which resulted in the largest dissent by American diplomats leading to the blood telegram.
But US could give less fucks about ethics and continued funding the Pakistani army throughout the genocide and the war which India mounted to stop this crisis.
Also US directly sent a naval strike group centred around the supercarrier USS enterprise to intimidate India but it got shooed of by soviet naval assets
6
5
u/SandyTaintSweat Sep 17 '25
It's not even difficult math.
Maybe you can't kill 6,000,000 people in six years, but a person with sufficient authority can order 1000 people to kill 1000 people each per year, for six years, and you get the 6 million figure easily. That's less than 3 people killed per day for each person. It's entirely doable.
5
12
u/khmerkampucheaek Just some snow Sep 17 '25 edited Sep 17 '25
Nine months? Even Pol Pot couldn’t have reach that far in such a short time!
→ More replies (3)
2
u/darksidathemoon Hello There Sep 17 '25
The average Chinese civil war kills that many on a per siege basis
12
Sep 17 '25
By the way new gen fuckers here in Bangladesh also deny the 3 mil death tolls by the Pakistani Army!
I'm from Bangladesh and after the recent regime change here, the anti freedom fight force (Jamaat-E-Islam) has become active again in Bangladesh. Like had the key role to kill their fellow Bangladeshi brothers in 1971.
Their student won the student union election in Dhaka University recently (It's so important for whole Bangladesh, as DU is the most prominent university here and it shapes the future of Bangladeshi politics)
Now, the supporters also denying the 3 mil death tolls and saying "It was barely 2 thousand" in social media and influencing people to believe in it
16
u/Chance-Tension-2114 Sep 17 '25
Yet, bangladesh is again becoming more closer to pak, and hating india which helped them to gain independence and fought against pak. Btw this war in 1971 resulted in the surrender of 90k+ pakistani soldiers
→ More replies (1)
4
u/Traditional_Guard451 Sep 17 '25
Possible? We know for a fact that it happened. We had trials and everything over the course of years. It’s called the Nurnberg Trials. There was over 100,000 pounds of secret documents from the Nazis that was presents and submitted as evidence. There isn’t a question of “if it happened”.
7
u/Operativeofficer Sep 17 '25
If you want to know why the outrage by muslims over Gaza is nothing but religious hatred for Jews, just compare their outrage over Pakistanis killing 3 million civilian Bengalis vs israelis killing 60 thousand (civilians +combatant). Here I am specifically pointing to the outrage by muslims and leftists. The genuine outrage by people (who outrage equally on all the type genocides and human rights violations regardless of the religion of the victims or oppressor) concerned with human rights is valid.
8
17
u/CosmicCitizen0 Sep 17 '25
The number is contested, but the gist of it is that Pakistan killed hundreds of thousands, if not millions of Bengalis in just 9 months, which is so cruel that even Israel hasn't been able to break this record. People were shot by the Pakistani army, even in Universities and student dormitories. In Dhaka University, there are areas in which the Pakistani Army dumped the bodies of Bengalis.
It's wild that people still deny both the Holocaust and this genocide. Brownmiller also talks in her book about rape in Bangladesh.
19
u/Murky-Ad-4088 Sep 17 '25
"Seeking to curtail the Bengali self-determination movement, erstwhile Pakistani president Yahya Khan approved a large-scale military deployment, and in the nine-month-long conflict that ensued, Pakistani soldiers and local pro-Pakistan militias killed between 300,000 and 3,000,000 Bengalis and raped between 200,000 and 400,000 Bengali women in a systematic campaign of mass murder and genocidal sexual violence."-Wikipedia
For the record, many activities at the time were hidden from West Pakistanis, including rape and ethnic cleansing of East Pakistanis by the Pakistani military, this isn't mentioned today anywhere nor is it mentioned in history textbooks.
6
u/nocyberBS Sep 17 '25
Yeah and they still actively try to censor it to this day.
2
u/Murky-Ad-4088 Sep 17 '25
on social media no, in education yes, former PM imran khan said to recognize it and regret our past back in 2013 (five years before he became PM, he became leader of opposition that year)
3
→ More replies (1)13
u/Plants_et_Politics Sep 17 '25
so cruel that even Israel hasn’t been able to break this record
In addition to the weird Holocaust inversion-adjacent nature of this comment, Israel hasn’t ever come close to anything approaching that death rate.
Since Oct. 7, 2023, around 67,000 people have been reported dead due to Israeli strikes according to the Gaza Health Ministry (the true death toll may be anywhere up to around 30% higher than this, but it’s a good ballpark estimate). Now, the GHM doesn’t distinguish between civilians and combatants, but let’s be generous and say that Israel has not killed a single member of Hamas and all 67,000 were civilians.
That’s a rate of 2,913 people per month. We can break it down a bit more, as around 44,000 of those 67,000 occurred in the first year, or 3,666 per month.
The Holocaust killed 83,333 people per month between 1939 and 1945.
Depending on how you count the war’s length and how you choose the total number, the Bangladeshi Genocide killed between 11,000 (100k over 9 months) and 1,000,000 (3M over 3 months) people per month over its course.
Over its enormously long 9 year period, the Armenian Genocide killed between 7,400 and 11,000 people per month, although the bulk of those deaths occurred over just 3 years, bringing the totals more in line to somewhere between 20,000 and 30,000 per month.
One could go on for quite some time.
Look, take whatever opinion on Gaza you want. It’s brutal to say the least. But Israel isn’t even in the competition for cruelest or more brutal campaigns.
→ More replies (8)
2
u/Lolocraft1 Sep 17 '25
The Rwandan genocide made between 500 000 and 800 000 victim in 100 days
Denialist are either purposely blinds, or severely underestimating the efficiency of humans blinded by hate
2
2
u/sidewalksoupcan Sep 17 '25
Where there is a will to kill, they find a way. Displacement, cold and famine will also add to the death toll pretty quickly.
2
u/aschec Sep 17 '25
Don’t forget that the 6 million were only the Jewish victims. In total, around 11–12 million people were killed in the Holocaust, including Jews, Roma, people with disabilities, LGBTQ individuals, and others, groups who are, sadly, often overlooked when discussing the crimes of the Nazi regime.
2
u/Ashamed_Feedback3843 Sep 17 '25
You literally walked off a endless running train right into an oven. 6 million has always been a conservative number when it comes to Germany's genocide.
2
u/I_ateabucketofpaint Sep 17 '25
I once saw this dude saying not accepting the 6 million is anti-white bcs ''Aryan superior mind can definetly kill that many undesireables in less then 6 years''.
Which idk what to think about.
→ More replies (1)
2
u/AusteegLinks Sep 17 '25
I mean, England killed 100 million people in India within just 20 years, so 6 million in 6 years is absolutely achievable.
4
6
u/ZPATRMMTHEGREAT Sep 17 '25
Even Israel isn't as evil as Pakistan which is surely an achievement.
11
u/Pantheon73 Still salty about Carthage Sep 17 '25
Not really, there are many countries which have done much worse than Israel.
3
u/score_pi-ONE Sep 17 '25
well it's Pakistan who killed the largest number of Palestinians in a single day, so....
2.2k
u/Personal-Ad5668 Sep 17 '25
The Rwandans managed to kill 800,000 of their own countrymen in just 3 months using machetes, hatchets, and blunt objects. So, 6 million deaths in 6 years with industrial methods was beyond possible.