>>109059631>Wow didn't know soldiers cleaning an area with water meant the prisoners living in that area were automatically hydrated like a contact high.They'll suck the water out of the grout if they have to.
>Yeah because that's totally not a horrible taboo that many people wouldn't stoop to.Oh right, taboo. I guess they wouldn't eat because it's gross. It's not like they're literally starving to death or anything. Oh, wait.
>And that's even assuming the corpses aren't removed. And assuming that there are enough corpses for the majority of the prisoners to sustain themselves on.There would be eventually. That's the whole fucking point. It's not like the prisoners are breeding.
>And assuming that eating diseased, likely rotting, corpses is a viable way of not starving and totally wouldn't just kill you by eating the diseased meat.Diseased? They died by starvation, moron.
>>109059673>It does not take over a month to starve, it takes 2-3 weeks MAX.Nope.
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-long-can-a-person-survive-without-food/>Also bodies void themselves upon death due to muscle relaxation prior to rigor mortis, so soldiers are dealing with that regardless.Yeah. With water
>They also had toilets/outhouses and you don't need standing water for those.A person in late stage starvation isn't going to get up to go to the bathroom.
> It literally does not make any sense to build elaborate gas chambers that cost time and resources to kill off your prisoner population. There's nothing elaborate about a gas chamber. You can turn you bathroom into a gas chamber with some towels, bleach, and ammonia.
>Not to mention that even if they did use them and were as efficient as we're told to believe, why were there survivors? Why were people kept alive in the first place and not immediately sent into the chambers upon arrival?I don't know, but if the real Nazis were half as bad at designing a death camp as anons in this thread, that might be the cause.
