[94906] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Request for topic death on Cold War history (was "RE: Every incident is an opportunity")
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Alexander Harrowell)
Mon Feb 12 18:31:54 2007
Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2007 23:13:21 +0000
From: "Alexander Harrowell" <a.harrowell@gmail.com>
To: "micky coughes" <coughes@gmail.com>
Cc: "Olsen, Jason" <jolsen@devry.com>, nanog@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: <7bb79a490702121451k3fd1263cgb60caa1b3232aad4@mail.gmail.com>
Errors-To: owner-nanog@merit.edu
------=_Part_87537_6506071.1171322001793
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Causality? WW2=>nukes, cold war=>arpanet=>internet, surely?
On 2/12/07, micky coughes <coughes@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> Hmm, let's see.
>
> Nukes => cold war => arpanet => internet
>
> Yup, looks ok.
>
> On 2/12/07, Olsen, Jason <jolsen@devry.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Of course, but the point was the goal of that targetting. The
> > > US public by and large believed, and seems to still believe
> > [snip]
> > > If anniliation is the goal than it's of no importance, just
> > > bomb the densest population centers.
> >
> > To borrow from snarky comments past:
> >
> > Unless Vendor C has introduced a "no nuclear-apocalpyse" command that I
> > need to enable in IOS, it seems that this thread has wandered far from
> > the flock and subsequently lost most any relevance to the listserv
> > and/or topic that spawned it. Cold War strategy is fascinating and all
> > (I do mean that in a non-snarky way) but does it really belong on NANOG
> > after it has seemingly dropped any pretense of being an analogy for
> > anything list-relevant?
> >
> > -Feren
> > Sr Network Engineer
> > DeVry University
> >
> >
>
------=_Part_87537_6506071.1171322001793
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Causality? WW2=>nukes, cold war=>arpanet=>internet, surely?<br><br><div><span class="gmail_quote">On 2/12/07, <b class="gmail_sendername">micky coughes</b> <<a href="mailto:coughes@gmail.com">coughes@gmail.com</a>
> wrote:</span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"><br>Hmm, let's see.<br><br>Nukes => cold war => arpanet => internet
<br><br>Yup, looks ok.<br><br>On 2/12/07, Olsen, Jason <<a href="mailto:jolsen@devry.com">jolsen@devry.com</a>> wrote:<br>><br>> > Of course, but the point was the goal of that targetting. The<br>> > US public by and large believed, and seems to still believe
<br>> [snip]<br>> > If anniliation is the goal than it's of no importance, just<br>> > bomb the densest population centers.<br>><br>> To borrow from snarky comments past:<br>><br>> Unless Vendor C has introduced a "no nuclear-apocalpyse" command that I
<br>> need to enable in IOS, it seems that this thread has wandered far from<br>> the flock and subsequently lost most any relevance to the listserv<br>> and/or topic that spawned it. Cold War strategy is fascinating and all
<br>> (I do mean that in a non-snarky way) but does it really belong on NANOG<br>> after it has seemingly dropped any pretense of being an analogy for<br>> anything list-relevant?<br>><br>> -Feren<br>> Sr Network Engineer
<br>> DeVry University<br>><br>><br></blockquote></div><br>
------=_Part_87537_6506071.1171322001793--
