It isn't about that, or at least it shouldn't be.
We should all be capable of having a proper rational debate about something, without resorting to stupid comments just to try and "win the argument". We are all guilty of it. I certainly come over very heavy handed on the sarcasm when I think someone is being really stupid.
We should be open minded enough to listen to each other's counter arguments and offer our own views and opinions them.
There is a real risk of people falling into what could be termed "The Conspiracy Theorist" mindset. Every one on here knows that the media twists the facts and that various people, including the government lie to us on a regular basis.
It doesn't mean that they are lying every second of the day, but will certainly make us check out thoroughly anything they do say.
Obviously, if we are searching for "The Truth", we must therefore get it from another source. The problem is, that too many people fall into the trap of assuming that anyone who posts a video on youtube saying "This is the Truth" about something is somehow automatically telling the truth or has some answers.
They will give you what they claim are the facts but are often poorly researched pseudoscientific arguments, deliberately distort the facts and heavily try to push you into accepting their argument without thinking. (maybe they should work for News Corporation!)
The sad thing is, a lot of people on here who are genuine truthseekers, do fall into this trap and we end up with people proclaiming "The Truth" when none of us will ever know much for certain.
Now take for example the burning of bodies at Auschwitz-Birkenau.
I said they had huge furnaces to burn thousands of bodies. I actually assumed they were huge furnaces but on further research I discovered it was actually a large number (I think it was 52 at the end) of smaller crematoria ovens.
You came back about the amount of fuel that would require and quite rightly pointed out that the Germans were very starved of fuel oil by that point. You made the assumption that was what they ran on, but it was otherwise a perfectly valid point.
I'm not going to take anything you say without a source at face value, so I researched a little and found they ran on coke. I posted a link to where I got that from.
I wouldn't expect you to take anything I say at face value either, so if you had found another source that said anything different, or you found manifests that showed in the entire 3 year period, they only had 12 tonnes of coke delivered or whatever, I would expect you to post that so I could look at that and possibly review my position.
This is how we can have a proper debate. We are all on the same side and together we will dig the truth out from under the huge pile of bullshit.
If we just violently take exception to someone who disagrees with us, we just end up with a pointless slanging match.
I pointed out the inaccuracies and inconsistencies in HuGe's original post. Neither you nor him came back with any reasons why they weren't inconsistent apart from a comment about fuel. This suggest I might have had a point.
However, the reason I didn't originally point out what these inconsistencies were, is because I didn't want to distract from the neat concise basic point posted by MOJFK, which we ALL AGREED WITH.
So can we please get back to the point where we all agree that it didn't matter who won the war, as the money men behind it were going to come out on top, whatever happened?