Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

kbig22432 t1_jdqxdwd wrote

Reply to comment by iloveyoumiri in Mexico hopes to host Summer Olympics in 2036 or 2040. by PrincessBananas85

I always find it funny when people immediately want to bring up something off topic in response to a comment.

−38

hambone8181 t1_jdr7kpt wrote

Well, Brazil did literally just host the Olympics pretty recently. I wouldn’t say comparing a previous Olympics location to a proposed future one is “off-topic”

43

kbig22432 t1_jdr9bbn wrote

Why not engage the actual topic before whatabouting? How does one crime statistic factor into a separate country hosting the Olympics?

−39

hambone8181 t1_jdra2lh wrote

But follow the thread, though? It’s started with OP saying that because of Mexico’s high crime rate, they didn’t think they should host the Olympics. Then the follow up was that a previous Olympic host country had even higher crime rates. The topic is crime rates as they pertain to a country’s “worthiness” to host the Olympics. I don’t see how it’s whataboutism to bring up the crime rates of previous host countries to inform the discussion of what is an acceptable rate of crime for a host country to have.

29

kbig22432 t1_jdrayec wrote

They brought up one crime rate, from a country that doesn’t currently have a huge portion of their budget dedicated to fighting large scale drug cartels.

Sure, it could be useful to look at murder rates, but the grand scheme of Mexico’s ability to host the Olympic Games is much larger than murder rates.

My point is your knee jerk reaction to the question shouldn’t be to bring up a country that isn’t even in the same hemisphere.

−29

TheShishkabob t1_jdrfyu6 wrote

You're allowed to disengage with a topic when you've been proven to be wrong. You don't even have to apologize if you don't want to, but why would you continue to make a fool of yourself like this?

17

kbig22432 t1_jdrjdor wrote

How about political crime, does that count? Should we be allowing the Mexican government to use funds generated around hosting the Olympics to further enrich cartels?

https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-mexico-drugs/mexico-cartels-paid-4-5-million-political-bribes-court-idUKTRE81A05A20120211

How much do you think the government will pay to turn down the hostility while the games are hosted? When you’re talking about crime rates, racketeering is a factor as well.

But I’m the one that needs to take the L.

−6

TheShishkabob t1_jdrlu4l wrote

Have you tried actually reading the comments?

>I hope not just because of their huge crime problem.

That started this chain. This was followed by someone pointing out that Brazil, who hosted the Olympics a mere 8 years ago, has a higher crime rate. You then barged in, like an absolute buffoon might I add, and pretend that a direct comparison to an actual and recent Olympic host nation was somehow "whataboutism".

You're wrong because you refuse to read or don't know what the words you're responding to and with mean. That's either illiteracy or ignorance, take your pick. So yes, you are indeed "the one that needs to take the L".

12

Dev_WhoDat t1_jds0wt0 wrote

Let's be honest, my guy tried to call someone out but actually forgot or didn't know that Brazil actually hosted the Olympics and now just doesn't want to admit it so just keeps digging his own grave deeper and deeper

7

kbig22432 t1_jds8awi wrote

I didn’t forget about it, I just didn’t think it was a good starting point for a discussion.

>”American Olympic champion swimmer Ryan Lochte became the latest victim of Rio's street crime early Sunday morning when he was robbed at gunpoint after attending a party. That follows robberies of representatives from Portugal, China, Australia, Russia, and even an attempted mugging on the chief of security for the Games outside the opening ceremony, which ended with a bodyguard shooting and killing the assailant.”

https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/olympics/rio-2016/2016/08/14/rio-olympics-muggings-brazil-tourism-woes/88719804/

Precedents doesn’t mean prudent, meaning just because it was done before doesn’t mean it should be repeated.

And that’s not to say that Mexico shouldn’t get the games. The whole point of this is statement that Brazil’s homicide rate was higher doesn’t no work argument wise. It’s just a fact with now analysis.

But no one is interested in that.

0

TheShishkabob t1_jdtg8py wrote

In the continuing saga of how you're wrong, you picked out the proven lie to attempt to make a point.

Lochte wasn't robbed. That's the lie he told but it was actually proven that the "robbers" were security guards and what they were doing was stopping him and a group of other swimmers since they were pissing on the side of a gas station and vandalized a framed poster of some kind.

I can kind of give the media a pass for the initial mistake since swimming was one of the bigger Olympic sports for Americans at the time, but the correction was issued months later and you've had eight years of debunking that source already.

2

kbig22432 t1_jdrne6v wrote

And again my points aren’t addressed. Instead the focus of what I’m saying is the word I used , “whataboutism”, and not the point I’m making, that using an example from another country (and a single crime statistic at that) isn’t a good basis for a discussion.

>“I hope not just because of their huge crime problem.”

>”This was followed by someone pointing out that Brazil, who hosted the Olympics a mere 8 years ago, has a higher crime rate.”

Except if you actually read what they said in reply to the precipitating comment, they never said “crime rate” they said murder.

>”You then barged in, like an absolute buffoon might I add, and pretend that a direct comparison to an actual and recent Olympic host nation was somehow "whataboutism".

How similar are the two countries? How is crime enforced in Brazil compared to Mexico? How is crime reported? All of these are factors that contribute to the conversation, yet none of that is addressed.

>”You're wrong because you refuse to read or don't know what the words you're responding to and with mean.”

Interesting, considering the nuanced approach I’m taking to the discussion of Mexico’s ability to host the Olympics compared to one simple statistic.

By the way, “a mere eight years” is an idiotic take on world politics. If you live in the US, you know very well how different a country can be in that amount of time.

0

TheShishkabob t1_jdrsu8a wrote

>And again my points aren’t addressed.

Let's just drop this with a quote from an earlier comment in this thread

>>Why not engage the actual topic before whatabouting?

I guess it's time to take your own advice.

4

kbig22432 t1_jdrtake wrote

Might as well, you’re not adding anything to the discussion anyways.

0

Uffffffffffff8372738 t1_jdsxko7 wrote

I haven’t seen someone in quite a while that was so fucking willing to not except an absolutely obvious L.

2

kbig22432 t1_jdrhy5e wrote

Who has proved what I’m saying is wrong?

Are you saying it’s wrong to want to look at a the country’s problems individually before making comparisons?

I guess that settles it then. If Brazil can hold off all the murder long enough to hold the games, then Mexico should be able to.

Nevermind the medical tourists that were kidnapped, two of whom were killed by cartels, forget about the .50 cal the cartels were using to shoot at aircraft at the airport. Let’s talk about murder rates from South America.

Btw, my wife is Mexican, my mother and father in law are from Nayarit and we have family there still. We talk about what it’s like dealing with the cartels in the next state of Sinoloa.

−7

Bucksandreds t1_jdrg0ny wrote

I don’t think Mexico or Brazil should be hosting the Olympics given their murder rates. You’re way off base though, claiming that the arguments aren’t useful or unrelated. Take the L and move on.

4

kbig22432 t1_jdrggld wrote

What arguments? One person brought up murder rates.

−1