james Posted April 21, 2008 Report Share Posted April 21, 2008 Thank you big Baron! I wonder why the world is so divided on a simple thing like continent. The truth is that the English defination of continent is the right one. Seven continents best divide the earth into continental regions. Artantical don't have human beings who made it their home yet. Tetonic lateral drift is not enough to define what a continent means, though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Faster Posted April 21, 2008 Report Share Posted April 21, 2008 Well in at least 2 major global sports, Faster, they are classified separately. As you well know, FIFA recognizes a CONCACAF for North America, and another one for the South. FIVB (volleyball) similarly has a NORCECA and a CSV for the South. The other sports that don't are operating in the past century and better get with it fast. There has been talk within FIFA of merging CONCACAF and the South American union into one because it would create a confederation that has relatively the same number of countries as the other confederations. It would also prevent crappy countries like Trinidad and Tobago from making it into the final tournament. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FYI Posted April 21, 2008 Report Share Posted April 21, 2008 I don't how anyone can say that politically speaking the Americas' are defined as one. In the U.S., the term "Americas" is hardly ever used. When the Beijing Torch Relay was passing through here eariler this month, the news networks repeatedly & solely said "on it's 'only North' American stop"- being San Francisco. Even though there was a South American leg as well. Why the "sole" argument of sports federations is being used is also kinda funny, since they're not the sole embodiment of what defines world geography. All textbooks, atlases, almanacs, classes, are very explicit that there are 7 world continents & not 6, & clearly show the seperation of North & South America. Even when one looks up the term "Americas", it specifically says that it's a large area in the Western Hemisphere comprising of *two* continents. And comparing a continent like South America to *regions* like the Middle East & North Africa is lke comparing apples & oranges. The perspective comparatability of such world regions in the "Americas" is Central America, the Midwest or the Caribbean, which are somewhat large areas but as big as a continent like South America. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baron-pierreIV Posted April 21, 2008 Report Share Posted April 21, 2008 There has been talk within FIFA of merging CONCACAF and the South American union into one because it would create a confederation that has relatively the same number of countries as the other confederations. It would also prevent crappy countries like Trinidad and Tobago from making it into the final tournament. If it's a matter of equalizing the numbers, then that's a totally different order. They are just throwing countries together for better competition -- and I can understand that to a certain point. But that still does not erase the intrinsic fact that there are really 6 inhabited land mass groupings called 'continents.' If the IFs like FIFA are doing that, then it will be for expediency's sake not because of a fact that Australia/Micronesia is 'truly part' of Asia. BTW, where does FIFA group NZ? Are they part of SA? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KRATK Posted April 22, 2008 Report Share Posted April 22, 2008 I don't how anyone can say that politically speaking the Americas' are defined as one. In the U.S., the term "Americas" is hardly ever used. When the Beijing Torch Relay was passing through here eariler this month, the news networks repeatedly & solely said "on it's 'only North' American stop"- being San Francisco. Even though there was a South American leg as well. Why the "sole" argument of sports federations is being used is also kinda funny, since they're not the sole embodiment of what defines world geography. All textbooks, atlases, almanacs, classes, are very explicit that there are 7 world continents & not 6, & clearly show the seperation of North & South America. Even when one looks up the term "Americas", it specifically says that it's a large area in the Western Hemisphere comprising of *two* continents. And comparing a continent like South America to *regions* like the Middle East & North Africa is lke comparing apples & oranges. The perspective comparatability of such world regions in the "Americas" is Central America, the Midwest or the Caribbean, which are somewhat large areas but as big as a continent like South America. Have you ever heard about the OAS - Organization of American States? Or FTAA - Free Trade Area of the Americas? Yes, there are a lot of political uses of America as a single continent, especially in its first years. I don't think Vespucci had known that the continent was in fact two large tectonic plates... so he called America to the continent close to actual Brazil, and then it was spread to other places like the U.S. Yes, North and South America are usually divided and considered as different continents (usually in the Anglosphere) because the differences between them and the geological division of the plates (but India has its own tectonic plate and everybody agrees that is an Asian country). And in the case of sports (what are we talking about) there is a clear difference between North and South America... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Faster Posted April 22, 2008 Report Share Posted April 22, 2008 Baron, also remember that Guyana, Suriname and French Guiana compete in CONCACAF even though they are not part of the classical definitional of North America. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baron-pierreIV Posted April 22, 2008 Report Share Posted April 22, 2008 Baron, also remember that Guyana, Suriname and French Guiana compete in CONCACAF even though they are not part of the classical definitional of North America. Do they really? I don't follow all those little footnote countries/territories as you do. Why is that? (Or maybe we should ask jim jones? ) Is it because they are not part of the Hispano-Portugo flavor of the SoAmerican federation, and that they are more attuned to the ex-French, Dutch and British colonies in the Caribbean and No-America? Well, once Israel was included in European groupings, all traditional boundaries just went to hell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Faster Posted April 22, 2008 Report Share Posted April 22, 2008 Do they really? I don't follow all those little footnote countries/territories as you do. Why is that? (Or maybe we should ask jim jones? )Is it because they are not part of the Hispano-Portugo flavor of the SoAmerican federation, and that they are more attuned to the ex-French, Dutch and British colonies in the Caribbean and No-America? Well, once Israel was included in European groupings, all traditional boundaries just went to hell. I can think Suriname as a Dutch colony would have been lumped with the Dutch islands that were more important, French Guiana at one point probably was administered as part of the French Caribbean, Guyana I have no idea. Israel, Kazakhstan, Azerbaijan, Armenia, Georgia compete in UEFA and Australia competes in Asia. So FIFA is not a good source. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cfm Jeremie Posted April 22, 2008 Report Share Posted April 22, 2008 Israel, Kazakhstan, Azerbaijan, Armenia, Georgia compete in UEFA and Australia competes in Asia. So FIFA is not a good source. Having been to both Kazakhstan and Azerbaijan, I can assure you that culturally speaking (by that I mean, way of life, food, way to dress, music), Azerbaijan is indeed European while Kazakhstan is more Asian. Defining a continent by physical geography is way too superficial. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baron-pierreIV Posted April 22, 2008 Report Share Posted April 22, 2008 Of course, my native Waziristan is very chic Indo-European, while our neighbor, the parvenue Durki-burkhistanese are very Basmati-Asiatic. All of our epics about Genghis Khan and the Mongol hordes are shot there in Durki-Burkhistan!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Faster Posted April 23, 2008 Report Share Posted April 23, 2008 Having been to both Kazakhstan and Azerbaijan, I can assure you that culturally speaking (by that I mean, way of life, food, way to dress, music), Azerbaijan is indeed European while Kazakhstan is more Asian.Defining a continent by physical geography is way too superficial. Yea, Azerbaijan is cultural European to some extent but geographically it is still Asian and that is the definition being employed by FYI. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KRATK Posted April 23, 2008 Report Share Posted April 23, 2008 Baron, also remember that Guyana, Suriname and French Guiana compete in CONCACAF even though they are not part of the classical definitional of North America. Those countries are in CONCACAF because they didn't have enough money to bribe the CONMEBOL leaders. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thorbr Posted April 24, 2008 Report Share Posted April 24, 2008 Terrorism BESIDES violence........... oh God! Will Chicago be able to make it???? Violence In Chicago Could Affect 2016 Bid Posted 11:51 am ET (GamesBids.com) Supporters of Chicago’s bid for the 2016 Summer Olympic Games are concerned that a recent rash of deadly violence could affect Chicago’s bid for the 2016 Games. CBS reports there’s also concern among many South Side residents that the violence may spiral out of control. One resident said, “with all the violence going on, who’s gonna want to come here when people are getting shot left and right”, while another called it “humiliating” and “embarrassing for our city”. At a town hall meeting Wednesday night attended by 400 residents and activists, part of their message was aimed at city officials who plan to transform Washington Park into an Olympic Village. Denise Dixon, executive director of Action Now said, “there’s more than just Washington Park to be cleaned up, there’s the 15th Ward, 16th, 17th that have to be cleaned up”. Tom Foulkes, a 15th Ward Alderman disputed concerns that city leaders are more focused on winning the Olympics than on winning the war on gang violence. “How can you not care when 30 people are killed in one weekend? That’s not true…We all care about what’s going on”. What do u have to say about that boy from the Phillippines... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Faster Posted April 24, 2008 Report Share Posted April 24, 2008 Terrorism BESIDES violence........... oh God! Will Chicago be able to make it???? Violence In Chicago Could Affect 2016 Bid Posted 11:51 am ET (GamesBids.com) Supporters of Chicago’s bid for the 2016 Summer Olympic Games are concerned that a recent rash of deadly violence could affect Chicago’s bid for the 2016 Games. CBS reports there’s also concern among many South Side residents that the violence may spiral out of control. One resident said, “with all the violence going on, who’s gonna want to come here when people are getting shot left and right”, while another called it “humiliating” and “embarrassing for our city”. At a town hall meeting Wednesday night attended by 400 residents and activists, part of their message was aimed at city officials who plan to transform Washington Park into an Olympic Village. Denise Dixon, executive director of Action Now said, “there’s more than just Washington Park to be cleaned up, there’s the 15th Ward, 16th, 17th that have to be cleaned up”. Tom Foulkes, a 15th Ward Alderman disputed concerns that city leaders are more focused on winning the Olympics than on winning the war on gang violence. “How can you not care when 30 people are killed in one weekend? That’s not true…We all care about what’s going on”. What do u have to say about that boy from the Phillippines... Obviously you have no experience with the fear-mongering American media. They just love law and order stuff and making it seem like everything is so dangerous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FYI Posted April 24, 2008 Report Share Posted April 24, 2008 What does that say for Rio then. Not exactly a safe haven for tourists. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Faster Posted April 25, 2008 Report Share Posted April 25, 2008 Even thought we are making crime and issue, do you honestly think it will drasatically affect a bids chances? Atlanta has a crime problem, it hosted, and if these people cared about crime the World Cup in 2010 would be in Morocco and not South Africa. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FYI Posted April 25, 2008 Report Share Posted April 25, 2008 I totally concur with you. I was just being facetious over thorbr's ridiculous question over Chicago's bid. If he's so concerned about violence in other cities, he should start by looking in his very own back yard of Rio de Janiero. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aronious Posted April 25, 2008 Report Share Posted April 25, 2008 CSI, Cops, Homocide....all terrific shows eh? I'd still value Tokyo or Madrid as the safer bidding cities....at least from my late night experiences returning to my hotel from Tokyo Disneyland Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FYI Posted April 25, 2008 Report Share Posted April 25, 2008 Again, as has been pointed out by many, that has nothing to do with anything. Besides, all of those incidences happened in a certain area of the south side (like the Bronx in NYC or Watts in L.A.). It's not like it happened in the tourists sections or popular areas. Every major city has their crime ridden, run-down area (i.e. London's East-End, which is now being rejuvenated because of the Olympics, which the IOC embraces plans like those). So lets stop with the biases. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baron-pierreIV Posted April 25, 2008 Report Share Posted April 25, 2008 Hey, those chose to commemorate the CENTENNIAL OLYMPC Games in the Murder Capital of the US at the time. There has to be a badge of honor in hosting the Olympics and having a lot of homicides. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thorbr Posted April 25, 2008 Report Share Posted April 25, 2008 I totally concur with you. I was just being facetious over thorbr's ridiculous question over Chicago's bid. If he's so concerned about violence in other cities, he should start by looking in his very own back yard of Rio de Janiero. Oh but you forget that besides that, you are ALSO the number 1 target for terrorism.... I know about Rio's problems! I don't think anyone here denies it! The point is some people here love to say that Rio couldn't host because of violence, etc... they forget that you ALSO have violence... and you are the most developed country in the world! and BESIDES that, you are a bigger threat for olympic's security because of terrorism........................... I'm just trying to point out that talking about violence in the cities won't be a major thing for the IOC, in my opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baron-pierreIV Posted April 25, 2008 Report Share Posted April 25, 2008 So was Spain; London, Tokyo., Moscow. But nothing happened in Lake Placid 1980, Los Angeles 1984, the World Cup in 1994 and Salt Lake in 2002. So what's the beef? Terrorism happened because we let our guard down, being an open - friendly society. And you forget, the CENTENNIAL Games were given to the murder capital of the US at the time. Because a lot of measures are in place since 9/11, concerns about terrorism in the US shouldn't be a factor for the IOC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rafa Posted April 25, 2008 Report Share Posted April 25, 2008 So was Spain; London, Tokyo., Moscow. But nothing happened in Lake Placid 1980, Los Angeles 1984, the World Cup in 1994 and Salt Lake in 2002. So what's the beef? Terrorism happened because we let our guard down, being an open - friendly society. And you forget, the CENTENNIAL Games were given to the murder capital of the US at the time. Because a lot of measures are in place since 9/11, concerns about terrorism in the US shouldn't be a factor for the IOC. the biggest threat to the US is the US itself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aronious Posted April 25, 2008 Report Share Posted April 25, 2008 the biggest threat to the US is the US itself. how insightful Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thorbr Posted April 25, 2008 Report Share Posted April 25, 2008 the biggest threat to the US is the US itself. Of course... couldn't agree more! But they think the world hates them for free, so what can we do? Just because they are an "open", "democracital", "friendly" society as the phillippinian guy said up there. And BTW Baron, nothing happened in those ocasions... and nothing also happened in 2007, here in Rio... so think a little bit more before trying to diminish other's bids because of violence.... of course that during the games security is at another level, one that we don't see in our everyday lives... and it doesn't matter if it is in Rio, Badgah, Chicago or Siberia.... but terrorism............ isn't the same thing! Many in the world hates the US, and considering what's happening now with China, we have to agree that it would be a great risk for the olympic movement to give the games to Chicago. That's obvious. If people in San Francisco have stuff to say against China, can you imagine the list of awful things people will have to say around the world about the US? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.