Perhaps. It is interesting to think how this would have affected the declining British empire. Britain was seen as weak by Hitler for giving in to Gandhi's passive resistance movement. He couldn't understand why the British didn't just shoot them all. Either such brutality would have strengthened imperialist attitudes in the empire or weakened them. I don't think the British public would have approved judging by their support for the Indians.
I think novels like Heart of Darkness did a lot to make people aware of the real purpose of empire; as essentially a racket without policing. Even though you still hear BBC reporters banging on about Britain's gentrification of the third world.
On a parallel, the USA committed first hand and through proxy regimes very similar atrocities in Asia and South America and that without any real opposition. Certainly no one likens Kennedy, Nixon or Reagan with Hitler and Stalin. Yet together they are responsible for the deaths of millions of unarmed non-combatants whose only crime was to want to decide how their country was run.
My point is that most Germans and Americans accepted and even supported the genocide perpetrated by their leaders, but perhaps only because it was THEIR leaders who were guilty. When another country commits such crimes, their barbarity is never really questioned (unless they are our friends).