Argentina Stoking anti-UK sentiments?

[Mr Tickle]

Nationalism is one thing, using the Olympics as a tool for political ends is a completely different thing. I can support team GB and be patriotic without being political in the slightest. My country sees politicians and governments come and go, supporting team GB Im supporting my country.

Seeing that athlete, training on a war memorial offends me to the very core. If thats what you think the Olympics is about, then that depresess the hell out of me.

And the reason why people care about Jesse Owens in Munich because he was sticking it to people using the games politically.

[Shrek201]

Jesse Owens in Munich

I think it was in another city a few hundred miles northeast of the killing grounds of Munich.

[Athensfan]

And the reason why people care about Jesse Owens in Munich because he was sticking it to people using the games politically.

Jesse Owens in Berlin was arguably the greatest moment in Olympic history. It wasn't a political statement. It was a human statement. It underscored the very essence of what the modern Games are about -- race and nation are irrelevant, we are all striving to be our best, to be faster, higher and stronger. We all have that in common and we can celebrate it no matter what complexion it comes in.

Owens was instrumental in working with Avery Brundage to diffuse racial tensions surrounding Mexico City 1968. He opposed the "black power" gestures. He refused to entertain the idea that the Games were a two-nation brawl between Russia and the U.S. Throughout his life he campaigned for the depoliticization of sport.

I'm not sure what you're alluding to about Munich '72. Again, at those Games he tried to make peace within the American team and ease racial tension. It was Vincent Matthews and Wayne Colett that made spectacles of themselves by refusing to face the American flag in racial protest and by swirling their medals like toys. Owens was strongly opposed to all that. As near as I can tell he was a man of integrity and a man who stood for truth.

[Mr Tickle]

Sorry, I meant Berlin if that was what Zekekelso was meaning too.

[The Tower Bridge Fox]

I was against the Falklands war, I still believe they aren’t worth squabbling over,

The Falkland islands are a strange case though. They are far enough from the UK for it to be contentious that we are there , but no one from Argentina a has ever lived there, I think the only solutionis is joint sovereignty

[Shrek201]

I was against the Falklands war, I still believe they aren’t worth squabbling over,

The Falkland islands are a strange case though. They are far enough from the UK for it to be contentious that we are there , but no one from Argentina a has ever lived there, I think the only solutionis is joint sovereignty

No. Move the islands farther north. So that the Bahamas or the Channel Islands will have some company.

(Just as I once thought that if the Cubans and the Taiwanese exchanged homelands, there would not have been that near-nuclear armageddon in October 1962.)

[Gangwon]

I wondered when this would happen. Everyone under the sun who had a grievance with China used the '08 Olympics to advance their own agenda, it's only natural another power like Britain would experience the same. Expect more before Sochi.

[Guardian]

That remains to be seen. It is starting to get hard for the IOC to award the Games to countries that have some sort of political issues with other certain countries. This situation is one of them. The Beijing experience was going to be obvious because the CCP's idea of governance is well documented. The Sochi 2014 OG, in my opinion, is going to have the same scenario(s) as this one because of the country that is hosting it, too.

[Jimena]

it was intresting that this weekeng "las leonas" played against the UK and lost

[intoronto]

That remains to be seen. It is starting to get hard for the IOC to award the Games to countries that have some sort of political issues with other certain countries. This situation is one of them. The Beijing experience was going to be obvious because the CCP's idea of governance is well documented. The Sochi 2014 OG, in my opinion, is going to have the same scenario(s) as this one because of the country that is hosting it, too.

Brazil has territorial disputes with Guyana and other countries South Korea off course with North Korea.

2020:

Azerbaijan-Armenia

Turkey-Greece

Fact is all countries have disputes over territories.

[Lee]

I was against the Falklands war, I still believe they aren’t worth squabbling over,

The Falkland islands are a strange case though. They are far enough from the UK for it to be contentious that we are there , but no one from Argentina a has ever lived there, I think the only solutionis is joint sovereignty

So we should ignore the will of "British" citizens on the Islands?

[zekekelso]

Jesse Owens in Berlin was arguably the greatest moment in Olympic history.

That's pretty much the core of my point. If Jesse Owens in Berlin (which is what I meant; Munich was a simple mistake) is the "greatest moment in Olympic history," it's not because of the pure athletics of his events. It's because of the politics that surrounded his accomplishments.

Look, I'm not arguming the Olympics should be politial, just that they are.

[CanisMinor]

So we should ignore the will of "British" citizens on the Islands?

Well, since the British Citizens in the north of Great Britain and moanin' about being citizens, I suggest that the UK gives Argentina Scotland if they finally stop asking for the Falklands. Problem solved.

[zekekelso]

Everyone under the sun who had a grievance with China used the '08 Olympics to advance their own agenda, it's only natural another power like Britain would experience the same. Expect more before Sochi.

Why was China willing to spend $billions hosting the Olympics? Because they wanted to make a political statement, "Look how great we are." China used the Olympics, opening ceremonies, the cultural fair on the Olympic green to send specific political messages. "Tibet and Taiwan are integral parts of China. Always have been, always will be." If China is going to use the Olympics to promote their agenda, why shouldn't those that disagree use the Olympics as well.

Britain is going to use the Olympics to say how great Britain is. Russia is going to use the Olympics to say how great Russia is. That's an integral part of the game. That's why counties pay what they do to host. You can't pretend that doesn't exist and yearn for politics-free games. They are political to the core.

If China and Britain and Russia are going to use the Olympics as a platform to say, "Look how great we are." Then you have to expect others to use the Olympics as a platform to say, "No, you aren't."

I'm not saying we have to agree with those protesting a policy of the host nation, or protesting one of the Olympic sponsors. But I do think they are doing anything wrong with trying to get their message out.

[Shrek201]

That's pretty much the core of my point. If Jesse Owens in Berlin (which is what I meant; Munich was a simple mistake) is the "greatest moment in Olympic history," it's not because of the pure athletics of his events. It's because of the politics that surrounded his accomplishments.

Look, I'm not arguming the Olympics should be politial, just that they are.

I doubt that Jesse Owens was even political at all. He was just a dedicated athlete doing his job for his school and country. He just happened to be a black man cast in the perverted Olympics of that day. I doubt that he went to Berlin eagerly wanting to "stick-it-in-the-face" of that Austrian-born sociopath. And the fact that he disapproved of the black power display in 1968 by those two full-of-themselves guys, proves Owens carried no political agenda whatsoever in his life.

[Mr Tickle]

This is veering off the publicity stunt to a wider arguement. The point is the guy in the video is disrespecting a memorial to another countrys dead. Its shameful, totally shameful.

Hopefully they will think a bit more before they brainstorm a new idea. The fact that it sets their arguement back years each time they do it is probably lost on them.

[Shrek201]

I think it was meant only for local consumption...to rouse local nationalistic sentiment. They just didn't think it would draw any attention outside Argentinian circles.

[oakydoky]

Well, since the British Citizens in the north of Great Britain and moanin' about being citizens, I suggest that the UK gives Argentina Scotland if they finally stop asking for the Falklands. Problem solved.

I suggest you find out how politics work. That way, you'll understand that the UK can't give away anything -- especially not one of the FOUNDING countries of the United Kingdom.

Your comment, meant to be funny (and it will be received as such by several of the noted bigots here) in fact just illustrates your stupidity and cultural ignorance on the topic.Amen.

[Athensfan]

That's pretty much the core of my point. If Jesse Owens in Berlin (which is what I meant; Munich was a simple mistake) is the "greatest moment in Olympic history," it's not because of the pure athletics of his events. It's because of the politics that surrounded his accomplishments.

Look, I'm not arguming the Olympics should be politial, just that they are.

I disagree completely. If Jesse Owens had been a lackluster athlete there would've been nothing historic. He didn't do a lot if political grandstanding or speech-making. He just competed. His athletics did all the work. They rendered words amd srguments moot. It was meaningful because it showed the power is sport to transcend politics, to rise above dispute. He wasn't playing the political game he was playing his sport.

It's also important to note that the issue at hand (namely non-Aryans are inferior) is not your standard political issue. It is a moral one. The dispute wasn't over boundaries or economics or weapons of mass destruction, it was over the definition and value of a human life. The reason the moment was so powerful was that Jesse Owens success removed the conversation from the political sphere completely and exposed the Nazi view in very ordinary, wordless terms as a destructive, fear-based lie that threatened the whole human race.

[zekekelso]

I doubt that Jesse Owens was even political at all.

It doesn't really matter how policial Jesse Owens was. He participated in a highly political event. What happened on the track was going to have meaning far beyond a simple race. And because of that environment, we remember his accomplishments more than dozens of others with equally strong athletic performances.

You can't separate Olympics from the world in which they take place. And as TV producers well know, you can't separate the events from the people - their lives, their struggles, their stories. It can never be just about getting to fining line ahead of the other guy.

Great quote from Jesse Owens:

"But Hitler—he was something else. No one with a tinge of red, white, and blue doubted for a second that he was Satan in disguise. Not that I was too involved with Hitler in the beginning. I'd spent my whole life watching my father and mother and older brothers and sisters trying to escape their own kind of Hitler, first in Alabama and then in Cleveland, and all I wanted now was my chance to run as fast and jump as far as I could so I'd never have to look back….

If I could just win those gold medals, I said to myself, the Hitlers of the world would have no more meaning for me. For anyone, maybe."

That's from "I Have Changed." Great book. Read it if you get a chance, though it may challenge what you think you know about Jesse's lack of politics and his feelings towards Tommie Smith and John Carlos.

he was playing his sport.

If all Jesse Owens did was play a sport, if all he did was win 4 gold medals in one Olympics - why is his moment arguably the greatest Olympic moment?

[Athensfan]

I know the book. I still argue that Owens was not using the Games for political ends. All he did was compete. And he was the Michael Phelps of those Games. Everything he did was about sport and it exposed truth far more eloquently than boycotts, fists of black power, refusing yo applaud athletes of certain nations, etc.

I maintain that the reason it was so powerful was because it was non-political. Sure there were ramifications. Of course the setting made for an electric-charged atmosphere, but that doesn't make Jesse Owens political. He was just one of the best athletes of his era whose sporting success exposed the Nazi lie.

Writing about his experience in a book decades later is just recognizing the impact of the moment. It doesn't mean he's using the Games for political ends.

I maintain Jesse Owens was the epitome of sport transcending politics. Not sport devolving into political statements.

[Athensfan]

What did Jesse Owens do other than compete? He didnt make speeches. He didn't give Hitler the finger. He just won. And he happened to be black... That's not really a political action.

I wouldn't minimize those four golds either. That particular combination of wins has only been equalled once -- over 50 years later by Carl Lewis -- and never again. Owens is not your run of the mill gold-medalist (as if such a thing existed).

Oops. 48 years later. Sorry.

[zekekelso]

You cannot simultaneously argue that " Jesse Owens in Berlin was arguably the greatest moment in Olympic history" and that he did nothing more than participate in a track meet. I don't mean to minimize 4 gold medals in one Olympics. That might qualify for top 50 Olympic performances. Maybe even top 25. But viewed strictly as an athletic performance, there is simply no possible way to argue it as being "the greatest."

You argue it's the greatest moment because it did have implications, meaning and messaging far beyond the track. Even if he didn't intend it, even if he didn't want it, it did. You must know it has greater meaning; otherwise you wouldn't have put it at the top of the list. What exactly are you objecting so strongly to?

[oakydoky]

You cannot simultaneously argue that " Jesse Owens in Berlin was arguably the greatest moment in Olympic history" and that he did nothing more than participate in a track meet. I don't mean to minimize 4 gold medals in one Olympics. That might qualify for top 50 Olympic performances. Maybe even top 25. But viewed strictly as an athletic performance, there is simply no possible way to argue it as being "the greatest."

You argue it's the greatest moment because it did have implications, meaning and messaging far beyond the track. Even if he didn't intend it, even if he didn't want it, it did. You must know it has greater meaning; otherwise you wouldn't have put it at the top of the list. What exactly are you objecting so strongly to?

Indeed.

The fact that Jesse Owens is viewed so well isn't just because of his great athletic prowess but because of the context in which he triumphed.

It could be argued that Carl Lewis's 4-gold-medal haul in '84 was superior to Owens's if you understand that Jesse Owens required help in the long jump competition from German competitor to correct his run up and thus win. But the reason most people I suspect would put Jesse Owen's performance above Carl Lewis's is because of the circumstances surrounding Owens's wins.

[Athensfan]

You cannot simultaneously argue that " Jesse Owens in Berlin was arguably the greatest moment in Olympic history" and that he did nothing more than participate in a track meet. I don't mean to minimize 4 gold medals in one Olympics. That might qualify for top 50 Olympic performances. Maybe even top 25. But viewed strictly as an athletic performance, there is simply no possible way to argue it as being "the greatest."

You argue it's the greatest moment because it did have implications, meaning and messaging far beyond the track. Even if he didn't intend it, even if he didn't want it, it did. You must know it has greater meaning; otherwise you wouldn't have put it at the top of the list. What exactly are you objecting so strongly to?

I apologize if I seem to be overreacting. I'm objecting to the idea that Jesse Owens made some sort of political statement or exploited the Olympics for political ends. Yes, there were broader implications to his victories. But those implications are meaningful precisely because he did NOT resort to political tactics. He demonstrated the power of sport to communicate human truth in a way that trumped politics.

And personally, considering the hostile environment and the extraordinary difficulty of the particular four golds he won and the fact that the feat has never been equalled in a fully attended Olympics, I'd rank him in the top 5 of all-time great performances.