North American Network Operators Group
Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical

Re: Request for topic death on Cold War history (was "RE: Every incident is an opportunity")

  • From: Mike Lyon
  • Date: Mon Feb 12 18:56:54 2007
  • Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=uB4qMnV4toKtBPJw8Epi1xomEpuReSCIIrW3HQnXkAANrqfRUCSbrShkeEaDDHaj/HaO7/f/AHNyjA+ylEgXeytyyioYvrGASl/p9jmYKQZe1AA03AunuJLxsa6tFsar5Lr3PjgUlzUfDQS4/lcOSKx/2G0XDPdQ0xu5GIoBLpU=

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 <[email protected]> wrote:
Causality? WW2=>nukes, cold war=>arpanet=>internet, surely?


On 2/12/07, micky coughes <[email protected] > wrote:
>
> Hmm, let's see.
>
> Nukes => cold war => arpanet => internet
>
> Yup, looks ok.
>
> On 2/12/07, Olsen, Jason <[email protected]> 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
> >
> >
>