Quote:
Originally Posted by valo403
The fact that teams have been attacked as recently as this year runs contrary to the whole 'the IGB's would make sure that doesn't happen' argument. The fact remains that such guarantees simply aren't possible to make in many countries, hence their status as unstable locations. The lack of infrastructure, and mass corruption, makes implementing a reliable security plan incredibly difficult, if not impossible. I wouldn't lump South Africa and Brazil into that category, but when you get to places like Pakistan you're stepping into a new level of concerns.
|
Actually, I never said that IGBs would ensure that such events would not occur but rather stated that the IGBs would ensure that the likelihood of such events happening in 'unstable' countries would be close to the likelihood of the same events happening in 'stable' countries. In 'unstable' countries where they are unable to assure themselves this could happen, events would not be awarded. Like you said, there are 'unstable' countries where this would be impossible but there are also 'unstable' countries where it possible. As such, we cannot say that we shouldn't award major sporting events to 'unstable' countries. It is similar to saying that females should not be able to become firefighters because some females lack the physical strength necessary.