Holocaust question

[King]

Final solution =Endlosung, exterminated=ausgerottet, if you look at the polcy documents you will see that they start with the use of "extermination" and end up wilth a "final solution", the final solution is just the same policy implemnted differently. In late 41 the Uk added 17 names to the warcrimes list from then existing camps as being guilty of extermination, in 44 they added more for the final solution, all were chrged with committed the same crime, they were charged with other members from Belsen Bergen/Auswitz "For being responsible for the well being of the persons intered there, in violation of the laws and usages of war were toghether concerned as parties to the ill treatment and of certain persons causings their deaths." It made no difference that Auscwitz was causing x deaths per day more than because the policy of the final solution allowed more to dispatched in a shorter time span, the crime was not how many, how quick, but that it was done at all. The German Judge at the Degresh directors trail said "Millions of people have been saved by the use of Zyclon B from typhus and other epidemics, very few in Germany believe in the final solution." Here you have a Judge in 48 rulling that Zyclone use in Auschwitz saved lives and aquitting people beacuase it did, funny old world...

Examp[le of the other solution would be:-

Riechenau order to Einsatrppen D, Otto Ohlnedorf 20:10:41
"The Jewish System here must be exterminated once and for all",

Otto and co shot 90,000 odd people and replied "The Jewish question in this vicinaty has been resolved."

Genocide or mass murder?, extermination or final solution?. would it make a difference it had been 5,000?.

What about the 5,000,000 other undesirables the Germans liqedated?, was that a Genocide of the undisrable, or simply murder?

Linguisticly and policy wise those on trial make difference in the terminology of whjat they did.

I have deleted out the information about Hoess, primarly for space reasons. These post are getting too long. yes you are right though with the Einsatzgruppen running riot in the USSR the date has to bemoved back to 1941. However consider these:

Aims of Jewish policy - 18th December 1937 by Adolph Eichmann

The provisional objective of Nationalist Socialist Jewish policy must be:
1. The pushying back of Jewish Influence in all spheres of public life (including the economy)
2. The encouragement of Jewish emigration.
The future work of the SD must move in this direction. The SD must become an effective instrument of the RFSS in this sphere too, which can periodically propse necessary draft laws to the Government.

Exctract from a Directive to the RSHA - 24th April 1940
1. The Jewish emigration from Reich Territory is to be encouraged as before even during the war.

If we go along the route that from the very begining the Germans wanted to exterminate all the Jews they could get thier hands on (the policy they finally followed), what was holding them back was the means to do so. Why are they still encouraging emigration in 1940? Why not keep them in Germany untill the means is there?