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
>
>