Submitted by PrincessBananas85 t3_122dy37 in sports
kbig22432 t1_jdrjdor wrote
Reply to comment by TheShishkabob in Mexico hopes to host Summer Olympics in 2036 or 2040. by PrincessBananas85
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?
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.
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".
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
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.”
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.
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.
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.
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.
kbig22432 t1_jdrtake wrote
Might as well, you’re not adding anything to the discussion anyways.
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.
[deleted] t1_jds2nny wrote
[removed]
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments