content: I usually don't even go near the chemical arguments at all. When you consider the stakes for Germany economically in WWII and the fact they were at war with the world's superpowers on multiple fronts both land and air, it's so cosmically ignorant to suppose that Hitler would enact a plan to genocide a people by loading them onto trains to concentrate them locally, killing them in an expensive and inefficient theatrical way, just to then dispose of the bodies in an even more expensive and inefficient way. It is senseless. When one has the goal of murdering millions of people, humans have already figured out the most economical way of approaching genocide: bullets. You march through where they are, and you shoot them. The mere fact that this is not what they did makes it clear that killing them was not the goal. It was about extracting labor from them. We have to also remember the Transfer Agreement. There were incentive programs for Jews to leave Germany prior to WWII. Therefore, those who didn't were taken as prisoners in labor camps where they were rationed and forced to work. Sounds like plain old war to me, guys. Let it alone that they had theaters, public swimming pools, sports teams and shops in these establishments. It doesn't seem like most of the popular horrors in these camps started occurring until the Allies caused them, by cutting off the supply lines intentionally to exactly where they knew these prisoners were living. Almost like the Allies wanted to create these crises, or at least make the situation for the camps tragically worse.