Stinky The Clown
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Apr-09-08 04:41 PM
Original message |
I didn't like it (in the moment) when Carter ordered an Olympic Boycott in 1980 ...... |
|
.... but have come to see it as a brave act that was absolutely correct. Carter, already low in public support, did what he saw as right.
The Soviets had invaded Afghanistan. Carter canceled our Olympic involvement.
I think a similar action now, with China, would be in order.
|
libnnc
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Apr-09-08 04:42 PM
Response to Original message |
AlCzervik
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Apr-09-08 04:43 PM
Response to Original message |
2. Since China is funding the war i hardly think Dimson will call for a boycott. |
americanyouth
(69 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Apr-09-08 04:46 PM
Response to Original message |
|
Edited on Wed Apr-09-08 04:50 PM by americanyouth
There are always going to be conflicts in the world. Part of the whole point of EVERYONE'S Olympic involvment is to step back from those conflicts for a while, no matter who or what they effect or who disagrees with who, shake hands with each other, in a sense, and enjoy a worldwide past time. The people protesting China's hosting the Olympics for "peace and justice" are actually destroying the little peace that we as a world community have been able to maintain. Hell, given the situation, China is exactly who we SHOULD have host the Olympics, if nothing but to show them that, while we disagree with their policies, we want to resolve in a peacefull and brotherly manner. By holding these worldwide protests we only prove, once again, how petty we can be, even in an agreed time of peace.
|
Hangingon
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Apr-09-08 05:01 PM
Response to Reply #3 |
4. Welcome! I agree with you. |
spoony
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Apr-09-08 05:05 PM
Response to Original message |
5. Absolutely. Carter is so piled on by the RW and the media |
|
but he was, and is, a man of tremendous principle and fortitude. And you're spot on about the Olympics.
|
trof
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Apr-09-08 05:16 PM
Response to Original message |
6. I kinda felt the same. |
|
Thought he was being a bit of a goody two-shoes, overreacting. Now I recognize the guts it took. And it was the right thing to do.
|
aikoaiko
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Apr-09-08 05:17 PM
Response to Original message |
7. I disagree -- The US boycott did nothing. Did the Soviet bycott change anything? |
LanternWaste
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Apr-09-08 05:23 PM
Response to Reply #7 |
9. Sometimes (as was the case in 1980) |
|
Sometimes (as was the case in 1980), I believe that our statement of intent was louder than Soviet inaction.
Although it may not have changed Soviet policy, it was an additional (and very loud) way of saying, "we do not condone your actions".
To me, boycotts, strikes, etc. are not merely about winning, or gaining even the most marginal of victories-- they are also de-facto statements of belief.
|
LanternWaste
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Apr-09-08 05:19 PM
Response to Original message |
|
I'm torn.
I believe that Pres. Carter did an honorable and noble thing, and it was the right thing to do in 1980.
However, in 1933, Jesse Owens made a statement just as loud, just as large and (arguably) just as honorable by playing in the Olympic Games.
Two diametrically opposed stands, yet both leading towards the same statement of intent.
|
indepat
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Apr-09-08 05:29 PM
Response to Original message |
10. And if the US is still in Iraq when the next Olympics come to the state, would such invite boycott |
|
by those opposed to Prue-emotive war?
|
Warpy
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Apr-09-08 06:51 PM
Response to Original message |
11. Some points to consider |
|
Edited on Wed Apr-09-08 06:51 PM by Warpy
First, a US boycott wouldn't stop US tourists from attending the games or stop anyone else. The economic impact would be negligible.
Second, the only people to suffer from a US boycott would be our athletes. That's what made the 1980 boycott such a tragic mistake. It changed nothing. It just deprived a lot of people who had been training their whole lives the opportunity to compete.
Third, the Olympics are non political, despite Carter and despite how odious we think the Chinese crackdown in Tibet is.
Fourth, and most importantly, a nation that started a war on another nation, a nation that unilaterally discarded the Geneva Conventions, a nation with rendition and torture as official policy, HAS ABSOLUTELY NO MORAL STANDING to use to boycott any other nation in the world. People would laugh and they'd be correct to do so should Stupid puff himself up and declare his moral outrage had led to a boycott.
|
damonm
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Apr-09-08 06:54 PM
Response to Reply #11 |
americanyouth
(69 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Apr-09-08 07:02 PM
Response to Reply #11 |
|
"Third, the Olympics are non political, despite Carter and despite how odious we think the Chinese crackdown in Tibet is."
f**kin' a
|
Stinky The Clown
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Apr-09-08 07:12 PM
Response to Reply #11 |
14. On your fourth point ...... |
|
..... regarding our (complete lack of) moral standing ...... yeah .... there is that!
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Sun May 05th 2024, 04:46 PM
Response to Original message |