The Olympics: angle, politics.

[SamuelRSmith]

Mr Khan said:
1. A bit of pride in your country is nothing bad (too much pride is where the problem goes). It's harder to envision from a first world country perspective, but imagine even second-tier countries like Kazakhstan and the winner of that one biking event. A country of meagre means, and you've got someone who can out-bike the best that money can buy, and that's something

2. I'll agree it's getting a bit overblown, but there's the matter of pride again. Just like when you host a house party, you want your home looking good, or perhaps a bit better, than it usually looks.

If anything, that's an admission that they're not good at their job the rest of the time. Our house looks clean, year round

3. Describe these crackdowns?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/9385271/Police-may-be-arresting-marginal-terror-suspects-to-clear-decks-for-Olympics-says-watchdog.html 

http://abcnews.go.com/Sports/wireStory/britain-deploys-1200-troops-olympics-16842668#.UBVipLRDySo 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/11/london-rooftop-missiles-olympics_n_1664653.html 

4. Again, it's about saving face. It is sad but true that the government will care less about expending a lot of blood and treasure to stop a few riots that relatively few people outside the country really care about, but you sure as hell don't want to be 1972 West Germany, where you clearly don't do enough and then one country's olympic team gets targeted. Terroristic events at the olympics are a point of national embarrassment.

5. You used the buzz-word "wealth creators" and therefore this entire point is automatically invalid.

Didn't actually use that term. But, there's nothing wrong with it, if I did.