Anonymous asked in Politics & GovernmentOther - Politics & Government · 1 decade ago

if adolf hitler didn't kill 6 million people and instead let those people work ........?

well i was thinking , if adolf hitler didn't kill 6 million people and instead let those people work , do you belive he would have lost the war ?

because if he had let them live he would have stimulated his economy and in turn he would have been able to financially support his army and wouldn't have gone into debt .

10 Answers

  • 1 decade ago
    Favorite Answer

    Very interesting question. First off, let me correct your numbers. Hitler killed approximately 11 million people in his assorted camps, about 6 million of which were Jewish. As far as the Jewish go, less than half this number were killed on arrival in 'extermination camps'. Approximately 1.5 million were killed before the construction of the camps by Einsatzgruppen - mobile death squads. The rest were put to work, used in medical experiments, etc. and died as a result, or were later killed toward the end of the war in a desperate push to exterminate them as the allies moved toward the camps.

    Now that we have that out of the way.... I once had it put forth to me that war was good, as it was good for the economy. I had to prove or disprove this statement. Sadly, I had to agree that while the intentional waging of war is completelly reprehensible, it does stimulate the economy in some cases. If there is a draft in effect, it kills off the 'excess' work force and forces full employment, which does indeed stimulate the economy to a point.

    I have to question if Germany had the resources available to care for and feed that large a number of people, had they decided to care for and use their perceived 'enemies of the state' as additional workers. From everything I've read, rationing of food items and other necessities was in full effect for the civilian population for quite some time before the end of the war. Caring for these people and using them all as workers would have negated the killing of the excess work force, preventing full employment by the local civilian population.

    I do not feel this would have stimulated the economy any further and would have actually negated the benefits they did derive from the waging of war. Especially since by very concept of 'enemy of state' you are going to need to concentrate them in a few easily controlled areas to keep an eye on them. The logistics of providing quality food, care and supplies, all necessary for the maintenance of a healthy workforce, would have actually driven him further into debt.

    At least, that's my take on it.


  • 1 decade ago

    The Holocaust never had any impact in Hitler's losing the war (no matter how barbarous it was carried out). The serious error that Hitler had committed is the cardinal mistake in conducting any warfare... that is, in fighting a two-front war. He was fighting both in the Western Front (against Anglo-American forces) and the Eastern Front (against Russian forces) at the same time. His whole armed forces was spread out between these two fronts. Had Hitler concentrated his campaign first on the Western front alone, he surely could have defeated the Anglo-American forces. Once that is accomplished, he could have then re-grouped his forces and concentrated on the invasion of Russia.

  • 1 decade ago

    He would have had an extra 6 million mouths to feed plus put up with subversion tactics.

    If Hitler had not been a paranoid ego maniac he would have won the war in Europe.

  • 4 years ago

    "i could face as much as. i'm youthful, quite solid and did boxing in intense college and would pass quite loopy if i desired to (yet i'm a regulation abiding non violent guy or woman), i could use something to stand as much as a baseball bat, knife, spade something, As i mentioned im a non violent guy or woman, i help out my friends yet i constantly stand my floor whilst cornered." i'm specific you could. yet could you win? If it substitute into purely you and 10 heavily armed SS adult adult males? i'm specific you're greater healthful, solid and a powerful fighter. yet ought to you handle - and beat - a gang of experienced squaddies all by using your self? I doubt it. What in case you weren't solid and youthful? What in case you have been older, or disabled, or a woman on her very own? the percentages of you defeating 10 heavily armed adult adult males could be even much less. and whether you probably did deafeat the ten heavily armed squaddies yet another 10 could come alongside. as quickly as your government contraptions out to persecute you, there is not any longer a hell of plenty you're able to do.

  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • Gary D
    Lv 7
    1 decade ago

    He did "let them work" by force in labor camps. They built roads, buildings and railways for the nazis. When they couldn't be used anymore, he executed them in the gas chambers or by firing squad. d:(

    You should watch the movie Schindler's List to find out more. It's a very good movie, but very graphic.

  • Tom Jr
    Lv 4
    1 decade ago

    Hitler's "Final Solution" killed not only 6,000,000 Jews; but also millions of gypsies, disabled persons, homosexuals, and potential enemies. Not to say 6,000,000 Jewish deaths isn't horrible in itself; but Hitler was even more evil than just that.

  • 1 decade ago

    Actually, I understand that Hitler killed 15 million people.

    I'm glad he's in hell now.

  • 1 decade ago

    ...Still, Germany will lost.. i mean can u compete with all those advanced countries, like greate britain and U.S. NOWAY!...additinally, this would never gonna happen...lmao, who is adolf hitler? an cold-blooded animal...he did not give a damn about others, only his own belief

  • 1 decade ago

    Yeah, fair point. But who wants a Jew working for them?

  • C = JD
    Lv 5
    1 decade ago

    Interesting scenario. At least you're thinking about these things.

Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.