1. Post a better answer to the question #1?
2. Address the challenge in Hannover's post?
3. Continue complaining about my omission of a particular detail in his/the author's fantastical & fictional "Holocaust" story?
clearly suggesting that the 3000 men were supposed to have done all the work by themselves without any support.
I agree that I could have been more specific about that because it is the standard storyline, so your initial point (that the "official story" includes local collaborating groups) is appreciated. The dodging however is not.
The question I was quoting did not specify anything of the sort with these local groups, and it was a response only to the questions. But of course, just because the 21 questions uses all sorts of strawman arguments isn't an excuse for me to have been careless with even one sentence of the hundreds I posted in response...
It still is ridiculous that they would have used only 3,000 of their own men
for this alleged genocide, I contend. So we are to expect that the local forces which would have outnumbered them would be happy to go from town to town killing every Jew for no reason, keeping it top secret, and never turning around and executing these 500-1000 Germans instead? Never would they plot any sort of ambush? Hmmm... Maybe. But something being theoretically possible doesn't mean it happened, but the alternative case means it did not.
A better choice perhaps would be to conscript these local populations into normal warfare and use only a handful as guides and translators. But this is all hypothetical, since the alleged extermination of Jews is a fictional event.
It also would have been ridiculous for those involved in the moon landing to have used some moon "rocks" as cheese for a cheeseburger. But that is all contingent upon the moon being made of cheese, which is not true in the first place, so the particular details are meaningless.
Isn't that the same charge that revisionists make against the exterminationists?
Well you can read this yourself being done in the 21 questions, the author is obviously not very well read on the topic and does exactly that, it is perhaps the primary strategy of the exterminationists. Not that it justifies revisionists doing the same thing, but I don't equate a detail omission with a strawman in the first place. If that part was added to my brief response, you could have pulled out any number of other details and complain about my omission of them.
The reality is: since the alleged "extermination of jews" did not take place in the first place, the specific details are actually irrelevant.
What is most curious that you do not try to answer the question #1 better, nor do you try to answer the challenge in the OP of this thread. You merely reiterate the exact same thing that you already said. And I suspect that your next reply (if it happens) will do the very same thing.
whether it is one million or two, or any number in between, isn't the point , is it?
Sure it is the point. As is the entire accusation of an extermination policy, which you appear unable to substantiate.
All you are doing is complaining that someone who does not believe in your ridiculous fantasy has not explained it in exactly the way you wish it was, and then dodging the challenge to prove it actually happened in the way you allege. Surely if you reply again, you will reiterate how much this minor detail ommission bothers you - something us "Deniers" have experienced in nearly every single discussion we have had on this issue. I guess we're just used to it though.
there is no need to pretend that they claim things they do not
So I take it that you are admitting to being the author of the laughable 21 questions, or a personal acquaintance of him/her who has been explicitly told that the author does in fact state what you are saying they believe? I don't accept the premise that you are telepathic and can actually know what the author believes.