Maybe I'm on my own here but aren't Paris and London the two least deserving cities of an Olympic Games? Can't we have them somewhere.. you know... interesting?
the modern day olympics are all about athletic facilities, housing capacity, and security. that pretty much eliminates the majority of those two continents, as sad as it is.
it's a great thought. i don't like it...i was just answering your question. also, there are several examples of cities where all the shit was built for the olympics and then it just sat there and rotted afterwards. building facilities and housing in the amounts needed also burdens the nation with the costs of maintenance once the games - and the visitors drawn by them - leave town. it's an extremely complex issue.
I agree that the Olympics as foreign aid is noble but pretty hard to accomplish. It's more likely that after the games come and go the cities will turn back to dust with their wig-spheres and whatnot.
I just want to see the games in more interesting places.
Modern day Olympics have been held in interesting cities: Barcelona in 1992 comes to mind (1996 Atlanta is so *not* interesting). This time around all the bidding cities were the largest cities in their countries.
Some candidate cities in Central and South America: Rio, Sao Paulo, Buenos Aires, Santiago; possibly Curitaba, Panama City, and Havana.
African cities are more difficult; I see that South Africa is the only realistic country with the event management ability and resources to pull it off. Capetown, Johannesburg/Pretoria, perhaps Durban--all have excellent modern sports stadiums, and successfully hosted major international sporting events before.
That's what it boils down to. I mean even Toronto lost to Beijing because of money. Not because the city is lacking anything requires to have an Olympic games. I mean like China really is a role model for international co-operation and human rights.
Yeah really I mean do they really need their heads any further up their own asses? They get all the good stuff. All the good broadway shows, movie shoots, terrorist attacks!
London and Paris are hardly uninteresting :: laugh :: It, however, doesn't make them undeserving, as you have to also ask : Can this actually get pulled off? Will they not only come up with the funding, but also create all that is necessary, well AND safely? Are people actually going to WANT to go to said locales? It would seem like an "of course", but there are even European cities that have a harder time pulling off international events on far smaller scales, making holding something like the Olympics completely infeasible. In the case of London and Paris, I have no QUESTION that this can be pulled off without a hitch (as opposed to -- say, Kjiv, who had a hard enough time pulling off the Eurovision Song Contest), and that gets points. Seriously, do you EVER think we'll see an Olympics in Chinisau?
Now Istanbul ... Valletta ... Jersusalem (I'm SO not holding my breath for this one) ... Rio de Janiero ... Lima ... Cairo ... another continent or even another PART of the continent (Eastern Europe).
Politics play a big part in the final vote, but getting shortlist is--for the most part--pretty transparent these days:
-enough hotel space for about 50,000 people (not including the housing for athletes in The Olympic Village) - a transportation system that can handle moving people and equipment consistently, effectively, and with backup alternatives. - a complete commitment of all levels of government (local, regional and national) - stable government; and - a track record hosting world sporting events (Olympics, world championships, World Cups, Tour de blah blahs)
Before this year's short list was made, Rio and Istanbul both had reasonable bids. But the stable government thing probably hurt Istanbul and Rio's transport system is dicey. Once Istanbul's EU accession negotiations become clear, their chances will increase dramatically. Rio would need to majorly improve transport.
As for Africa, there are currently only two cities that could possibly accomodate the hotel needs: Cairo and Durban. Jo'burg and Cape Town would need to add thousands of rooms.
If a smaller city gets the Games, and builds all this stuff and can't use it, they lose millions of dollars--the IOC doesn't want that hanging over heads.
Toronto now has an excellent shot at 2016, since it will be this hemisphere's "turn" again. Will depend on who the US puts up, but if the Yanks manage to stuff it up as badly as NY did--and no one from S. America or AFrica pulls something amazing together--Toronto in 2016 it will be.
South Africa is hosting the 2010 World Cup, so I wouldn't think they'd want to turn around and host the Olympics in 2012. But, if the WC goes well, perhaps they'll consider it in the future.
Security is an illusion. Fire-proof security comes at the expense of civil rights. Terrorist know this, security experts know this but the public remains ignorant.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
no subject
Date: 2005-07-06 03:55 pm (UTC)Why aren't the olympics in Africa or South America?
no subject
Date: 2005-07-06 04:02 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-07-06 04:05 pm (UTC)In the light of G8, maybe the olympics could be used as a method of aid and development.
If instead of the host nation fronting the money, it was part of an development plan, after the games there would be urban infrastructure.
Just a thought.
no subject
Date: 2005-07-06 04:10 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-07-06 04:36 pm (UTC)I just want to see the games in more interesting places.
no subject
Date: 2005-07-06 09:48 pm (UTC)Some candidate cities in Central and South America: Rio, Sao Paulo, Buenos Aires, Santiago; possibly Curitaba, Panama City, and Havana.
African cities are more difficult; I see that South Africa is the only realistic country with the event management ability and resources to pull it off. Capetown, Johannesburg/Pretoria, perhaps Durban--all have excellent modern sports stadiums, and successfully hosted major international sporting events before.
no subject
Date: 2005-07-06 04:34 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-07-06 04:38 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-07-06 04:58 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-07-06 06:06 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-07-06 06:56 pm (UTC)Now Istanbul ... Valletta ... Jersusalem (I'm SO not holding my breath for this one) ... Rio de Janiero ... Lima ... Cairo ... another continent or even another PART of the continent (Eastern Europe).
no subject
Date: 2005-07-07 12:16 am (UTC)-enough hotel space for about 50,000 people (not including the housing for athletes in The Olympic Village)
- a transportation system that can handle moving people and equipment consistently, effectively, and with backup alternatives.
- a complete commitment of all levels of government (local, regional and national)
- stable government; and
- a track record hosting world sporting events (Olympics, world championships, World Cups, Tour de blah blahs)
Before this year's short list was made, Rio and Istanbul both had reasonable bids. But the stable government thing probably hurt Istanbul and Rio's transport system is dicey. Once Istanbul's EU accession negotiations become clear, their chances will increase dramatically. Rio would need to majorly improve transport.
As for Africa, there are currently only two cities that could possibly accomodate the hotel needs: Cairo and Durban. Jo'burg and Cape Town would need to add thousands of rooms.
If a smaller city gets the Games, and builds all this stuff and can't use it, they lose millions of dollars--the IOC doesn't want that hanging over heads.
Toronto now has an excellent shot at 2016, since it will be this hemisphere's "turn" again. Will depend on who the US puts up, but if the Yanks manage to stuff it up as badly as NY did--and no one from S. America or AFrica pulls something amazing together--Toronto in 2016 it will be.
no subject
Date: 2005-07-07 12:37 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-07-07 04:56 pm (UTC)Was this related to the Olympics or coincidence? Were there bombers waiting in Paris or NYC or Moscow?
If the richest cities in the world can barely manage security, how would less wealthy cities handle it?
no subject
Date: 2005-07-07 05:09 pm (UTC)