Since the Athens games have more participating teams than the UN has members, it is a truly global event. To be sure, many small countries are only represented by one or two athletes with no realistic chance to win a medal, but their presence -- proudly announced in the Opening Ceremony, highly visible in the Olympic Village -- gives the games an unquestionably global color. This is hard to see on TV, which focuses almost exclusively on the events where Americans do well and downplays the rest.
The Winter Games are a much smaller affair -- fewer events, fewer participants -- given the fact that large parts of the world suffer from an acute lack of snow and ice. "Outsiders," like the famously inept British ski-jumper and the "cool-running" Jamaican bobsledders, are now largely excluded, for their own safety most of all and for the integrity of the sports. But the winter games are also a chance for small countries -- Sweden, Switzerland, Slovakia, Slovenia, etc. -- a rare chance to earn the global spotlight.
In order to be considered for the Olympic games, a sport must have an international organization that runs the competitions. It must be practiced in enough countries to make it truly international.
to become a truly global brand.
Jessie Owens By Amir :)
Jesse Owens
IOC President Juan Antonio Samaranch declared at the Closing Ceremony of the Sydney 2000 Summer Olympic Games,"I am proud and happy to proclaim that you have presented to the world the best Olympic Games ever." Subsequent Summer Olympics held in Athens and Beijing have been described by Samaranch's successor, Jacques Rogge, as "unforgettable, dream Games" and "truly exceptional" respectively - the practice of declaring games the "best ever" having been retired after the 2000 games.
World War I was a truly global conflict. Networks of alliances forced countries to become involved in the fighting, even if they did not directly have a stake in the conflict.
World War I was a truly global conflict. Networks of alliances forced countries to become involved in the fighting, even if they did not directly have a stake in the conflict.
No it only truly affected the United States
i really dont know :D
Because it is truly a giant conspiracy between the witches and the global governments and the homosexually obsessed.
The first ones that were truly global were in 1986 in Oxford and 1988 in Moscow.
The only case where a global variable is advantageous is when that global is a constant variable and it represents a truly global concept. The value of PI, for instance, is a truly global concept and it has a constant value. The exchange rate between dollars and Sterling is also a truly global concept, but it is non-constant and should not be declared global. Global (non-constant) variables are problematic because it can be difficult to track down all the places that interact with a global, especially if the global has external linkage. Even if that is not a problem in itself, a global cannot cater for both single-threaded and multi-threaded applications. If intended purely for single-threaded applications then there will be no synchronisation mechanism, thus it cannot be used in a multi-threaded application as this could lead to a data race. Conversely, if intended purely for multi-threaded applications, it will have a synchronisation mechanism but this could lead to performance issues on single-threaded applications where synchronisation is not required. In trivial applications, global variables can often be useful because the scope of a global can be well-defined. But in non-trivial applications, it becomes more difficult to limit the scope of a global. One way to limit the scope is to declare the global variable static, thus limiting its scope to the translation unit in which it is declared (static global variables cannot have external linkage). However, by limiting the scope, the variable is no longer a truly global concept.