To Mexico? It's an extremely popular tourist destination?

Might as well, you’re not adding anything to the discussion anyways.

>And again my points aren’t addressed.

Let's just drop this with a quote from an earlier comment in this thread

>>Why not engage the actual topic before whatabouting?

I guess it's time to take your own advice.

[removed]

[removed]

The opportunity for cartels to kidnap and murder has never been so big!!! They must be really excited!!

[removed]

And again my points aren’t addressed. Instead the focus of what I’m saying is the word I used , “whataboutism”, and not the point I’m making, that using an example from another country (and a single crime statistic at that) isn’t a good basis for a discussion.

>“I hope not just because of their huge crime problem.”

>”This was followed by someone pointing out that Brazil, who hosted the Olympics a mere 8 years ago, has a higher crime rate.”

Except if you actually read what they said in reply to the precipitating comment, they never said “crime rate” they said murder.

>”You then barged in, like an absolute buffoon might I add, and pretend that a direct comparison to an actual and recent Olympic host nation was somehow "whataboutism".

How similar are the two countries? How is crime enforced in Brazil compared to Mexico? How is crime reported? All of these are factors that contribute to the conversation, yet none of that is addressed.

>”You're wrong because you refuse to read or don't know what the words you're responding to and with mean.”

Interesting, considering the nuanced approach I’m taking to the discussion of Mexico’s ability to host the Olympics compared to one simple statistic.

By the way, “a mere eight years” is an idiotic take on world politics. If you live in the US, you know very well how different a country can be in that amount of time.

Have you tried actually reading the comments?

>I hope not just because of their huge crime problem.

That started this chain. This was followed by someone pointing out that Brazil, who hosted the Olympics a mere 8 years ago, has a higher crime rate. You then barged in, like an absolute buffoon might I add, and pretend that a direct comparison to an actual and recent Olympic host nation was somehow "whataboutism".

You're wrong because you refuse to read or don't know what the words you're responding to and with mean. That's either illiteracy or ignorance, take your pick. So yes, you are indeed "the one that needs to take the L".

This doesn’t sound problematic at all!

How about political crime, does that count? Should we be allowing the Mexican government to use funds generated around hosting the Olympics to further enrich cartels?

https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-mexico-drugs/mexico-cartels-paid-4-5-million-political-bribes-court-idUKTRE81A05A20120211

How much do you think the government will pay to turn down the hostility while the games are hosted? When you’re talking about crime rates, racketeering is a factor as well.

But I’m the one that needs to take the L.

Who has proved what I’m saying is wrong?

Are you saying it’s wrong to want to look at a the country’s problems individually before making comparisons?

I guess that settles it then. If Brazil can hold off all the murder long enough to hold the games, then Mexico should be able to.

Nevermind the medical tourists that were kidnapped, two of whom were killed by cartels, forget about the .50 cal the cartels were using to shoot at aircraft at the airport. Let’s talk about murder rates from South America.

Btw, my wife is Mexican, my mother and father in law are from Nayarit and we have family there still. We talk about what it’s like dealing with the cartels in the next state of Sinoloa.

Cartels will give the money to the government. Government bribes the IOC. Olympics in Mexico/Profit

What arguments? One person brought up murder rates.

I don’t think Mexico or Brazil should be hosting the Olympics given their murder rates. You’re way off base though, claiming that the arguments aren’t useful or unrelated. Take the L and move on.

You're allowed to disengage with a topic when you've been proven to be wrong. You don't even have to apologize if you don't want to, but why would you continue to make a fool of yourself like this?

Why?

[removed]

[removed]

We'll all be war ravaged by then

They brought up one crime rate, from a country that doesn’t currently have a huge portion of their budget dedicated to fighting large scale drug cartels.

Sure, it could be useful to look at murder rates, but the grand scheme of Mexico’s ability to host the Olympic Games is much larger than murder rates.

My point is your knee jerk reaction to the question shouldn’t be to bring up a country that isn’t even in the same hemisphere.

But follow the thread, though? It’s started with OP saying that because of Mexico’s high crime rate, they didn’t think they should host the Olympics. Then the follow up was that a previous Olympic host country had even higher crime rates. The topic is crime rates as they pertain to a country’s “worthiness” to host the Olympics. I don’t see how it’s whataboutism to bring up the crime rates of previous host countries to inform the discussion of what is an acceptable rate of crime for a host country to have.

The thrill of watching world records escape with no fear of being shattered as athletes struggle for their lives at Mexico City's 7000 foot altitude.

Why not engage the actual topic before whatabouting? How does one crime statistic factor into a separate country hosting the Olympics?

Well, Brazil did literally just host the Olympics pretty recently. I wouldn’t say comparing a previous Olympics location to a proposed future one is “off-topic”