Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.
Display:
but the optics here--reward the country that went to war illegally, not the country that stood up against an illegal invasion--are awful.

At least we can rest assured that this was a sporting decision entirely free of politics.

Eh?

A la prochaine?

Pogo: We have met the enemy, and he is us.

by d52boy on Wed Jul 6th, 2005 at 09:13:55 AM EST
I wasn't aware that the people of Great Britain were all that hot on this war.
by NYCO on Wed Jul 6th, 2005 at 09:16:22 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Thank you - as one of the million and a half people who marched on the streets of london against the war (the biggest demonstration in the UK ever).
by Boudicca (badgerval at hotmail dot com) on Wed Jul 6th, 2005 at 09:36:51 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Ah . . . but will the people benefit from hosting the Olympics?

Pogo: We have met the enemy, and he is us.
by d52boy on Wed Jul 6th, 2005 at 09:38:38 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Yeah, but would the French people benefit either?
by NYCO on Wed Jul 6th, 2005 at 09:50:57 AM EST
[ Parent ]
OK, cards on table time.

I see that the Olympic Games are a way to sell huge infrastructure investments, and that some of that investment is of general benefit. But much of the megabucks thrown around goes to the same old bunch of fat cat usual suspects, and the curmudgeon in me doesn't like that, and doesn't like the fact that all this sports nonsense has to be used as the cover for urban renewal.

It's all about money, it's all about politics, and the people are more or less innocent bystanders. (Spectators, one might say.) So that's why I said at the start of this conversation that the optics are bad. The Games are not 'awarded' to the people of the UK or of London, whatever the rhetoric may say; they are awarded to the government.

I'm all in favour of urban renewal, but I'm not in favour of a gesture that apparently puts the stamp of approval on a government that chose to join in with an illegal invasion and occupation against the wishes of the UN Security Council.

Sorry to rain on the parade.

Pogo: We have met the enemy, and he is us.

by d52boy on Wed Jul 6th, 2005 at 11:56:10 AM EST
[ Parent ]
The idea of the 2012 Olympic Stadium design is that for the 3 week period of the 2 Games it will have a very large capacity (bigger I believe than the Stade de France) but afterwards a lot of the seating will be removed so the stadium "shrinks" to the size of a standard internation athletics stadium. The velodrome, stadium and swimming complex will form the basis of a new sporting excellence academy and be available for local use.

The Olympic village will be used for social housing afterwards and will use the improved road and rail infrastructure (a lot would have been in place anyway but there are some addtional links as a result of the games).  A lot of the site is a highly polluted disused industrial site at the moment so much will be spent on relaiming the land. Some has already been utilised for leisure land in the "Lea Valley Regional Park" but this will be further landscaped with river improvements and new landscaping after some of the temporary buildings have gone.

The improved infrastructure is part of the "legacy" that was an important aspect of the bid. The intention is that the Olympics will be linked in to sports for young people to provide the "next generation" who will be competing in 2012 and beyond. In sporting terms a proper Olympic standard swimming pool in the East of London is significant as there are very few in the capital (Crystal Palace being the other big one).

The Games are intended to pay their own running costs but the capital works are budgetted to cost and extra £2.2 billion. Much of this is to be funded from National Lottery income with addtional amounts coming from a £20 per year precept on the local property taxes accross London.

by Londonbear on Wed Jul 6th, 2005 at 11:02:44 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Display: