[94907] 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 (Mike Lyon)
Mon Feb 12 18:53:31 2007
Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2007 15:41:07 -0800
From: "Mike Lyon" <mike.lyon@gmail.com>
To: "Alexander Harrowell" <a.harrowell@gmail.com>
Cc: "micky coughes" <coughes@gmail.com>,
"Olsen, Jason" <jolsen@devry.com>, nanog@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: <a2b2d0480702121513g70d26fd3o51dc4c52b463e3cb@mail.gmail.com>
Errors-To: owner-nanog@merit.edu
Come on guys... Some more originality please... Internet--->Al-Qaeda
fundraising---->Afghanistan--->USSR vs. US---->Cold war---->
Arpanet---> Internet.
Vicious cycle.
-mike
On 2/12/07, Alexander Harrowell <a.harrowell@gmail.com> wrote:
> 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
> > >
> > >
> >
>
>
