Eisenhower death camps

Hello Sup Forums, I'm trying to learn about the eisenhowers death camps. i have seen a couple of photos and it looks pretty damning.
Does any of you have any documents/more photos that prove this war crime?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=TWHylyvZSr8
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oksbøl_Refugee_Camp
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rheinwiesenlager
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dachau_liberation_reprisals
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allied_war_crimes_during_World_War_II
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

If any of you can debunk the claims feel free to.

...

...

there is nothing to debunk. y

If this claim is true, people of certain political belief would benefit for spreading information of this warcrime

These deathcamps are really well documented. It's not a big secret or anything.

go on, spread it! i let all my friedns know about it some years ago ;)

so there is video evidence of this.... well that pretty much put the nail in the coffin.

Holy shit OP! I was an ex NatSoc, but you might have just put me back into place!

So, is the the REAL holocaust then? Is this where the bodies came from? And the holohoax is just the cover story?

I never heard of them before and I am half German.
Also, I am not "angry" about them, just as I am not angry about the British carpet bombing of civilians (after all war is war) BUT I am very angry about the hypocrisy of "Germans were bad, we are much different, we are good, join us!" It's the same as Israelis trying to act like the emperors of morality while mistreating Palestinians in a manner not dissimilar to what Nazis did to them. I am not saying that the Palestinians are the "good guys" I am just saying that while such hypocrisy exists, humankind is doomed.

Checked

i don't think you can prove the bodies being move.

>trying to debunk the holocaust

you could argue that this was nothing more than a logistic error, and it wasn't on purpose

>date] [Auto] 2 new posts
I don't think you can prove the all the photos were taken where they say they were either.

Wouldn't make sense. The bodies would rot and possibly fall apart

i just found this video
youtube.com/watch?v=TWHylyvZSr8
the content make me sick.

>Hello Sup Forums, I'm trying to learn about the eisenhowers death camps.
You might have come to the wrong place.

Sup Forums has no idea about history.

true, but the video i just linked is pretty hard to explain

reminder that general patton was assassinated

well he was trying to start a war with the bolshevik swines. maybe it was for the best. the world needed peace.

You have to be very gullible to believe this shit. There's literally no evidence whatsoever for it ever existing. No documents, no bodies, no witnesses. Nobody in Germany has even heard of that shit.

just search for some citations from eisenhower concenring the german people. he literally said he hated them and wanted them to perish

>Sup Forums has no idea about history.

There are aspects of WW2 that are hidden history as far as the west goes. It's a similar situation with the U boat war against the USA in the early stages where the US was completely unprepared to defend their coastal shipping and the massive losses were covered up.

Stop baiting. The Rheinlager are 100% real. What OP means is that these camps where specifically kept in shitty conditions to kill many Germans.

The Neo-nazi claim is that 1 million soldiers died in these camps, when in reality it was barely 10,000.

>I never heard of them before and I am half German.
well the death camps in Poland were financed by American business, and we had death camps in the USA for Japanese people, so no surprise it's pretty standard military industrial complex procedure

>There are aspects of WW2 that are hidden history as far as the west goes. It's a similar situation with the U boat war against the USA in the early stages where the US was completely unprepared to defend their coastal shipping and the massive losses were covered up.

>hidden history

Youre a fuckwit.

If you ever wondered what Rock Island or Andersonville looked like in the civil war, here you go.

Don't fuck with USA.

It's not mentioned at all in American history books. Might be in specific college history books, but it doesn't get taught at the lower levels.
t. home school parent with a giant library of school books

Americans did nothing wrong, that's what POW camps look like if you take millions of prisoners within a couple week. You filthy Danes where the ones who forced German refugees into literal concentration camps.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oksbøl_Refugee_Camp

Yeah, obviously the camps existed, but they weren't death camps.

>Youre a fuckwit.
What the fuck cunt, I was just explaining how these things aren't common knowledge you asshole.

i don't mean anything, i just wanted to get to understand what happened.

you forgot to attach the file (i think)

How hard would it be to fiddle with these kinds of numbers though? I mean historical figures have always been a subject to political interests, why think this case would be any different?

Wouldn't the allies try to downplay the unnecessary damage they inflicted out of spite? How hard would it be to brush most of those under the "damages of war" carpet during the settling of the dust after war?

the video (linked earlier) shows quite a lot more than 10000

The military had full control of the press as well, the allies would not have deliberately set about to kill surrendered soldiers but it's common knowledge they lost the plot with the sheer numbers of men they held. The fact that the numbers and severity were covered up is common knowledge.

What I meant to say was that anyone with any formal education in history, or a real interest would know that. The battle of the Atlantic was incredibly important to the Allied war effort.

Because despite what Sup Forums likes to Larp about the National socialists, the Allies (excluding the Soviets) didnt just mass murder prisoners of war.

Thats something which most people fail to wrap their head around. The Nazis werent EVUL MONSTERS, but they werent exactly democracy and human rights loving buddhists. They saw nothing wrong with killing Soviets, political dissidents and Jews.

The average American was a drafted man from a country devoid of aristocracy, fanatical ideology (fascism) and had human compassion.

They wouldnt have murdered Nazis just out of spite, since Americans didnt exactly lose 10 million soldiers like the Soviets did. Soviet reprisals were expected. Amercians werent.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rheinwiesenlager

Look for the actual sources at the bottom of the article.

i can see is 2 sides making a claim. that usually means the truth is in the middle.
when the allies amid to killing 10k pow by poor conditions we can assume

Personal experience time. My biz partners father was a German teen during WW2. He surrendered to the US and they put him in a POW camp, eventually shipped him to a camp in the US. He loved America so much he stayed, became a citizen and prospered. That’s all I know. Except that my grandfather firebombed Dresden where my partner’s mother was left an orphan.

Yeah those pictures of lined up Germans that were mowed down by machine guns was just imagination, then.

People do crazy shit in wars. Why the fuck would Americans be any different?

>The average American was a drafted man from a country devoid of aristocracy, fanatical ideology (fascism) and had human compassion.
Complete and utter bullfuckingshit. Just look, there's evidence of the contrary in this very thread you mouthbreather.

>Andersonville
Literally the same as this, but 80 years earlier.

>that usually means the truth is in the middle
Creationists say the earth is 6000 years old. Autists say it is 5 billion years old. Therefore the earth is most likely 2.5 billion years old.
durr

only general eisenhower is rumored to have committed these crimes. Patton didn't treat his pow badly (so far as i understand) feel free to correct me

>Yeah those pictures of lined up Germans that were mowed down by machine guns was just imagination

can you link that file/video/picture

strawman.

Thats not how it works mate, since one side is the general consensus of the historian academia, the other side is one dude in the 80s making a bold claim without actual evidence.

James Bacque is considered a sensationalist revosionist.

>Yeah those pictures of lined up Germans that were mowed down by machine guns was just imagination, then.

Youre referring to the Dacha liberation reprisals.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dachau_liberation_reprisals

In fact if youre interested

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allied_war_crimes_during_World_War_II

>Complete and utter bullfuckingshit. Just look, there's evidence of the contrary in this very thread you mouthbreather.

Not sure what youre referring to.

low iq monkey

also you need to take off that flag before you post shill.

This is a load of hogwash. Americans were known for their brutality towards prisoners of war, and their mass rapes committed in Japan, Germany, and even France. Germans were more humane to the British and vice versa than Americans were to anyone, including their allies. America trampled all over the supposed rules of war on a regular basis.

Americans have always been a bunch of primitive barbarians desu.

Revisionism isnt history mate.

Beating up a 17 year old Wehrmacht soldier and executing 90% of Soviets prisoners isnt exactly the same thing.

Unless you're a newfag, in which case kys, you'd have to be blind to not have stumbled on them. The thing went public even then and it's fully confirmed. One of the few undeniable shit that took place.

Don't have the pics in this computer.

>general consensus of the historian academia
that just means literally nothing. historians are known to copypaste others opinion, and sooner or latter a opinion becomes fact/general consensus of the historian academia.

Read Hes referring to Dachau liberation reprisals.

>Not sure what youre referring to.
Andersonville, did you even read my post to the end?

Thats how history works. You cant just decide one day to make a claim about something without evidence.

This. It's kinda the same as with science in general, where everybody is concerned with their prestige and pretty much everyone parrots the few popular articles with lots of citations.

It'd be too risky to go against the flow, even in such an "objective and rational" system.

good thing nazis aren't people

> Hello guys, I'm trying to learn about ________ death camps
> insert any world leader, here are some suggestions:
Dalai Lama
Thatcher
Berlusconi
Ghandi
Please redpill me on all of those "deathcamps". Expert mode: No collages.

But history has never been touted as the ultimate truth, the denial, doubting or revision of which should be criminally punishable.

welp, that pretty bad looking.

that's correct. they were angels that came from above.

Imagine how easy it'd be to construe an entire policy of killing war prisoners from just a few images.

...seems eerily familiar?

i don't understand what point you are trying to make. maybe it's muh sub 130 iq

There's no such thing dumbass.

god isn't real

if you are referring to holocaust, there aren't any videos/ pictures to prove that.

>If any of you can debunk the claims feel free to.

PART 1

The claim, that 1 million German prisoners of war, rather than upto 56,000 (the highest estimate accepted by historians) dying in US captivity after World War II, were "casually genocided" in Eisenhower's rhine meadow camps ("Rheinwiesenlager") is a claim put forth by James Bacque in his book "Other Losses". But who is James Bacque? A philosophy major (!) from the University of Toronto, who also seems to hold a Bachelor's degree in history. Fair enough, but what did the man proceed to do with his bachelor's history degree for the next few decades after earning it? You guessed it, nothing. Bacque instead proceeded to become a fiction writer and essayist before finally turning his attention in 1989, to the fate of German soldiers held as POWs by the Allies after World War II. He then wrote this book, and is now hailed by the far right (not necessarily holocaust deniers, but Wehrmacht fanboys and those who spend great amounts of time trying to track down every war crime committed by the allies) as some kind of investigative journalist exposing the deliberate "casual" mass murder of upto 1 million German POWs by Eisenhower and subordinates. 1 million....sound familiar? The official Auschwitz death toll is 1.1 to 1.5 million. The intent is clear: creating an allied Auschwitz.

holy shit is that a _________ reference your iq much be close to the melting point of iron

>comparing the western and eastern fronts

Imagine being this retarded. Barbarism in the East was on both sides, Muricans were well-known to be the least civilised in the West.

And revisionism is a necessary and essential aspect of history you stupid cunt.

PART 2

Mr. Bacque misread (I'll leave to you whether it was deliberate or not) the documents he based his conclusions on and then coaxed a half-blind old man into confirming his reading. What’s utterly absurd is the notion that about one million or more German POWs could have died in US prison camps without such catastrophe leaving a distinguishable mark in German oral history (while there’s little if anything about this subject, there’s a lot about the horrors of Soviet captivity in the gulags), in the records of German state administration (which in the 1950s went out of its way to establish the fate of prisoners of war in Allied hands) and in the works of German historians, including Rüdiger Overmans and Paul Carell, who have written extensively about the fate of German POWs in Allied hands. Paul Carell, a former Nazi propagandist by the name of Paul Karl Schmidt, whose works about the war are dedicated to glorifying the German soldier, would have been the first to decry a crime of such magnitude if there had been any evidence that it occurred instead of leaving it to a Canadian fiction author to do so in the 1990s.

After the publication of Bacque's book, a panel of historians gathered for a symposium in the Eisenhower Center for American Studies at the University of New Orleans from December 7–8, 1990 to review Bacque's work. The historians concluded that the work:

- misuses and misreads documents
- ignores contrary evidence
- made no attempt to see the evidence he has gathered in relation to the broader situation
- puts words into the mouths of the subjects of his oral history

Academic reviewers question three major aspects of Bacque's work: his claims that there was no post-war food shortage in other European countries; Bacque's estimate of the number of German deaths; and the allegation that Eisenhower was deliberately vindictive.

I'm pretty smart

PART 3

Many German soldiers were sick and wounded at the time of their surrender, and Bacque does not place the plight of the German prisoners within the context of the grim situation in Western Europe in 1945 and 1946.

R.J. Rummel, a scholar of 20th-century atrocities, has written that "Bacque misread, misinterpreted, or ignored the relevant documents and that his mortality statistics are simply impossible."

More recently, writing in the Encyclopedia of Prisoners of War and Internment, S. P. MacKenzie states, "That German prisoners were treated very badly in the months immediately after the war […] is beyond dispute. All in all, however, Bacque's thesis and mortality figures cannot be taken as accurate".

Eisenhower biographer Stephen Ambrose, in a 1991 New York Times book review, claimed that "when scholars do the necessary research, they will find Mr. Bacque's work to be worse than worthless. It is seriously—nay, spectacularly—flawed in its most fundamental aspects. […] Mr. Bacque is wrong on every major charge and nearly all his minor ones. Eisenhower was not a Hitler, he did not run death camps, German prisoners did not die by the hundreds of thousands, there was a severe food shortage in 1945, there was nothing sinister or secret about the "disarmed enemy forces" designation or about the column "other losses." Mr. Bacque's "missing million" were old men and young boys in the Volkssturm (People's Militia) released without formal discharge and transfers of POWs to other allies control areas."

I want to add that conditions in the camps improved and, even more important, there was an enormous effort to release these POWs as quickly as possible. By the Fall of 1945 most of the camps were empty.

A book-length disputation of Bacque's work, entitled "Eisenhower and the German POWs", appeared in 1992, featuring essays by British, American, and German historians.

PART 4

Bacques 2nd book, "Crimes and Mercies" is no better. He claims the Allies fabricated the worldwide food shortage, that the "Genocide committed against the Germans" was due to “Anglo-Saxon militarism” and that English speaking nations were filled with “warlike peoples”. He gets numbers such as 9.3 million Germans being deliberately starved by the Americans and uses the same botched logic that he used in Other Losses. He blames the entire thing on Eisenhower, saying that he continued the "Morgenthau Plan" and that he “assured the prolonged starvation of Germans.”

Deniers love bringing up Morgenthau, conveniently forgetting that the plan was abandoned when public outcry forced its cancellation. Food supplies were short everywhere in Europe. The British rationed meat and other food products until 1954.

There you have it. Many historians disagree with this man's novels. We can safely conclude that this book does not belong on the hallowed history shelves which only have place for truth and reality, rather than fabricated numbers and false conclusions. It belongs into the same garbage bin that already holds a copy of Thomas Goodrich's "Hellstorm" and Viktor Suvorov's "Icebreaker".

As for the gulags...consider this: The death rate for Russian POW's in German custody was 60-65%. The death rate for Germans in Russian custody was 38%. That is a fairly massive gap. The Russian gulags were awful places, but the German treatment of the Soviet POW's was genocidal: massacres and documented deliberate starvation, which is why Russian POWs are part of the 11 million holocaust death toll.

PART 5

If you want to find out how German soldiers really died; when, where and by whose hand, then the books you should be reading are respected German military historian Dr. Rüdiger Overmans' "Soldiers behind barbed wire. German prisoners of war of World War II" (2000) and "German Military Losses in World War II" (2004), with the latter being the most complete reference work about German casualties in WW II. It is historiographic tomes like these that separate real historians from jokers like James Bacque and Thomas Goodrich.

I know, that's my point. The entire policy of exterminating jews is built on eyewitness testimonies, the lowest and most biased form of evidence there is, and on very few pictures, that could mean anything without the context they're given.

And to top it off there's a law requiring everyone to agree with 100% everything about it, with no further research or discussion allowed.

Yup, nothing to look into!

nic3 plac3 to pic a show that premotes violenc3 against nazis. BTFO

It's just "we wuzzing" from the deutschvolk.

why? stormfaggots still aren't welcome

>Don't fuck with USA.
...or Israel, they're both owned by the same 'people'

There is a military base nearby that has various historical markers that depict where German POW camps were set up. You can see some of the stuff they built, but it is quite old and hard to find if you do not know where to look. Metal detecting there is fun if you can stand the hike and want to dig through pine tree roots.

release remaining "jews"
fill camps with german soldiers
starve german soldiers
take pictures of dead and claim they are (((jews)))

>there’s a lot about the horrors of Soviet captivity in the gulags
Now is there, really? Only one book comes to mind.

There generally is very little information about such things moving around. What creates the perception of there being more is what is being talked about in the news, the papers, the books. As someone from a nation from which tens of thousands were sent to Siberia, I can attest that there's very little of information of it in the "oral history" of Estonia. Most of the information comes from documentaries and museums. People don't pass down stories via oral tradition anymore. This isn't the middle ages.

Also, why do you think they killed Patton?

>What I meant to say was that anyone with any formal education in history, or a real interest would know that. The battle of the Atlantic was incredibly important to the Allied war effort.

I was not referring to the broader battle of the Atlantic but of operation drumbeat, this operation was launched as soon as Germany declared war on the USA and led to huge losses of allied shipping, a huge German victory which was covered up in the darkest days of WW2.

>
>Because despite what Sup Forums likes to Larp about the National socialists, the Allies (excluding the Soviets) didnt just mass murder prisoners of war.

I'm not going to insult you... but suggest you read about the allies agreement at Yalta and the repercussions as it was implemented.

Did you mean to quote me or the post you cited?

First of all attack a point on the character of the man making the point is no well formed argument.
second!

you can't prove that.

because he wanted to start a war with the bolshevik.

he said we fought on the wrong side iirc

There are few texts on the issue and the dispute is controversial. The most extreme claims were proposed by an amateur historian, but his main detractor was in the employment of Eisenhower, admittedly to safeguard his legacy.

I can certainly believe that they deliberately starved people out of spite. I can also believe that they just weren't prepared for the logistics of dealing with millions of POWs and designated them DECs just because it wasn't possible to abide the conventions from a practical perspective.

We'll never know because the documentation has been fudged and burned, largely. Either answer was not good and the difference was just in the number of people that died. Could have been deliberate, could have been a cluster fuck.

People do tend to die in wars, though. Partially the reason not to have them in the first place.

>Yup, nothing to look into!

They definitely killed Jews for being Jewish, that's not really controversial. The big numbers might well be controversial, maybe in part the need for retroactive justification for that much carnage compelled people to embellish things a bit.

I suspect that you had a few death camps about the joint, a lot of corpses from starvation and disease and a US public weary from paying for war bonds and losing relatives overseas hungry for some justification for the whole show, and the result was Schindlers' list. Some truth in it, some showmanship and drama.

Anyone that thinks that the Germans didn't deliberately kill a single Jew is smoking the good stuff (they were pretty clear on their distate for international frugalists).

well, while the german population hatred grew for the jews, it's well documented that state (under hitler) transported thousands of jews to palestine.

Yeah, something like 70,000 I think in the 1930s. Sort of like dumbo drop (except with big noses).

>eisenhowers death camps.
america has the best propaganda in history

if I was a betting man, Id bet that anything like this was true and america could easily use propaganda to stop people investigating it or admitting it

(((americans))) you mean the mafia right.

ok you jewish shill

is the real world on to you, so now you and your friends are using Sup Forums to help with you propaganda?

If Germany had won the war, the game would have been prosecuting Patton and Eisenhower for treatment of POWs. As it stands, they lost, so their guys got prosecuted.

American propaganda has been about justifying the war to their domestic population, not detracting from their own war crimes, because only the losers of war get tried.