Well, if you're going to lawyer me, I'm going to lawyer you right back.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Willravel
It's still the Olympics. They still get medals just like the Summer. Maybe we can ask some people that ski, play ice hockey and luge if they think that Winter Olympic Competitors should be taken seriously.
|
Where did I say that I don't take the Winter Olympics seriously? Given the fact that I can say with a realitively good amount of certainty that I personally know more Olympians than just about anyone else on this board (one works here, one used to work for me at the fencing company, two guys I ran against in high school, one that works with my best friend and 3 other random ones) and that I used to train at a very high level, I think that I probably have a better idea of what it takes to get to the Olympics and what it meanst to be there. I take Winter Olympians very seriously and have the upmost respect for the effort it takes to get to the pinnacle of their sport.
But we're not talking about Olympians, are we? We're talking about Games. Those are two exclusive things. Winter Games take place in smaller venues with smaller crowds watching fewer sports. The logistics are simply different. Add that to the fact that the Winter Games are a comparatively recent invention (1932) and were really just an offshoot of the Summer Games, and you start to realize that the Winter Games are just a way to keep interest levels up for the main event of the Summer Games (at least in the modern era of 1960 onwards). So again, this thread is about logistics of the games and how those logistics (or their failures) will affect the Beijing Games. The simple fact of the matter is that the logistics of the Winter Games are simply not comparable.
So again, take your weak-ass arguments about the Winter Games out of here. They don't belong.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Willravel
You're saying it asinine to think that Dubai could build a lot in a matter of a few years?
|
I'm saying that it's assinine to think that they could create the new technologies needed and apply them in the manner you don't really appreciate in a matter of 10 years, which is how long it is until the next unawarded Games. So when you talk about the 2014 Games being awarded to Dubai, you really show that you have no idea what you're talking about. Considering that the major skiing events would almost certainly have to be held indoors in buildings several miles long but wide enough to hold the courses plus room for spectators - just assuming that they built them on nearby mountains - the energy consumption to keep them cold enough for the snow and ice would be enough to keep the Committee from even seriously considering Dubai for a Winter Games. So again, Will, you have no idea what you're really talking about here or you haven't thought it through. I'll leave you to decide which.
-----Added 24/7/2008 at 03 : 11 : 52-----
[
Quote:
Originally Posted by jorgelito
Honestly, I think it's because the world hate China and the Chinese. It's sad really.
|
I don't necessarily think that you're wrong, but I do know for a fact that it's not nearly that simple. When the expected favorite in the marathon - Haile Gebressalsie of Ethopia - declines an invitation because of health concerns with the heat and smog, I think that you need to stop and think about how polluted it actually is.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by jorgelito
LA is very polluted but we held the Olympics. Mexico City is very polluted but they held the Olympics.
|
While these are true, they're both small red herrings. Mexico City is polluted, but in 1968, the level of pollution wasn't nearly to the level that it is now. Going into those Games, there were air quality concerns, but they were much more along the lines of "holy shit, we're up high! Is there enough oxygen?" than about pollution.
Also, LA was smart enough to hold their last Games as close to the water as possible. Anyone who's spent time there knows that the closer you get to the water on most days the better the quality. That said, there were definitely health concerns about the pollution going into the '84 Games, the same as there are now. Having visited both cities in the past 8 years, I can tell you that Beijing most definitely has the worse air quality.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by jorgelito
Dlish, if it's human rights you're worried about, not many countries are immune. Certainly not Dubai. I would take China over Dubai. Dubai is way polluted too. The Tibet issue is for another thread. Australia had some controversy over the aborigines too I remember. Sarajevo is not exactly the model for a modern democracy and human rights haven but they still held the Olympics. Moscow, Seoul, Tokyo, even my beloved US - all these countries have questionable politics and human rights abuses. But none receive the level of criticism, hate, vitriol and invective that China has.
The media has come out guns blazing against China since day 1.
|
I'll just say that no country that's ever hosted the Games - Summer or Winter - is unassailable on the human rights question. That said, I firmly believe that the Games are about sport, not politics, and that politics should be left at home for the 2 weeks of the Games. They are a measure of human effort and the pinnacles of human physical accomplishment.