Can we have a legitimate, articulated, and well thought out discussion on the Holocaust? Here's what I'm bringing to the table. Let's try and debate like gentleman:

Now, regardless if you think this is right or not, allow me to set the scene here; Hitler and the Nazis wanted the Jews out of their country. The majority of Germans obviously backed that idea.

Hitler warned them on multiple occasions that they should leave, or they will be forced out. (inb4 "oh so that makes it ok to gas 6 million!?")

So, Hitler eventually sets up "concentration camps" (why were the American camps for the Japanese alternatively referred to as "internment camps"?)

These camps were built with pools, various areas for various activities, even including sports teams for Jewish people and POWs. Now, why would a place built solely for death have all of this? Why would the Nazis waste all of that time, effort, and resources for people who are basically already dead? Things don't add up.

Now, let's look at Zyklon B. A gas meant for delousing, lice being a big problem in the camps. (which is to be expected at any camp, especially when munitions and other resources are being cut thin due to prolonged Allied bombings, which brings me to my next point)

If Germany was being bombarded in all places strategic AND unstrategic (See: Dresden firebombings) how would you expect the health and welfare of their people to be like? If the soldiers can't even get a hold of any supplies, how can the prisoners? (Which explains the famished and diseased prisoners AND soldiers alike, a product of the intense, and prolonged bombings)

I'm not a full blown Holodenier, I'm just asking legitimate questions in a polite manner with my intentions ONLY to find the truth, not to cherry pick facts or points for evidence in an attempt to "prove" innocence on behalf of a particular side.