>>17813452
I think
>>17813426's argument is that if the Germans (who were far more organized and resourceful than the Hutus) had wanted to exterminate the Jews in Europe, they would have done a much better job of it in 4 years, percentage-wise, than the Hutus did in 4 months. That's another issue I have with mainstream Holocaust historians; they seem to believe, tactically, that the Germans were at once evil and incompetent in their dealings with the Jews, to the point that, although they gassed or shot most Jews immediately, the extermination camps were found by the Allies to still be full of women, children and elderly by the time they were liberated.
When the Red Army arrived at Auschwitz, for instance, they found thousands of elderly, disabled or sick people and small children who had been left behind as they had been unable to join the march back to Germany. Why did the Germans - who, at the same time, were said to be organizing a "death march" where all those who walked too slowly were shot - let these witnesses to their crimes live?
From a purely rational standpoint, mainstream historical discourse about the Holocaust is schizophrenic, casting the Germans as ultra-competent villains, but also bumbling idiots who left half of their victims alive to tell the tale.
