Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > alt.folklore.computers > #156571 > unrolled thread
| Started by | hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com |
|---|---|
| First post | 2016-01-12 18:53 -0800 |
| Last post | 2016-01-14 14:02 +0000 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 383 — 39 participants |
Back to article view | Back to alt.folklore.computers
Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-12 18:53 -0800
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-01-13 16:32 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-13 13:40 -0800
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Rich Alderson <news@alderson.users.panix.com> - 2016-01-13 17:04 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-01-13 17:11 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-01-13 16:10 -0600
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-01-13 14:23 -0800
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-01-13 18:52 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-01-13 17:20 -0800
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-14 08:03 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-01-14 14:20 -0800
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-01-17 03:37 -0600
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-01-17 23:07 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-01-18 15:11 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) mausg@mail.com - 2016-01-14 14:12 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Joe Pfeiffer <pfeiffer@cs.nmsu.edu> - 2016-01-14 08:27 -0700
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-01-14 14:26 -0800
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2016-01-16 16:21 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-01-16 14:59 -0800
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-01-15 14:51 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) mausg@mail.com - 2016-01-15 16:50 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-01-15 17:53 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-01-15 19:38 +0100
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-01-15 11:15 -0800
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-15 15:52 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-01-15 14:00 -0800
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-01-17 03:53 -0600
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-17 12:03 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-17 09:22 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-01-15 11:11 -0800
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-01-16 14:09 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-01-16 08:41 -0800
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-01-16 09:10 -0800
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-01-17 07:46 +1100
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-16 20:04 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-16 19:18 -0800
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-16 23:34 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-19 12:15 -0800
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-01-17 15:33 +1100
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-01-16 22:51 -0600
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-01-17 16:15 +1100
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-01-16 22:31 -0800
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-01-17 14:03 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-01-18 05:03 +1100
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-19 12:24 -0800
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-19 15:49 -0600
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-01-19 13:59 -0800
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "James Green" <667755@gmail.com> - 2016-01-20 10:31 +1100
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-19 19:50 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-01-19 17:46 -0800
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "James Green" <667755@gmail.com> - 2016-01-20 13:36 +1100
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-19 22:36 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-01-19 19:46 -0800
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-20 06:20 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-01-20 10:09 -0800
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-20 13:27 -0600
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-01-20 10:11 -0800
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "James Green" <667755@gmail.com> - 2016-01-21 05:56 +1100
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-20 18:35 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-21 10:35 -0800
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-01-21 16:45 -0600
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-21 19:13 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-20 17:33 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-21 09:34 -0800
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-01-19 19:40 -0600
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "James Green" <667755@gmail.com> - 2016-01-20 13:33 +1100
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-20 17:33 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-21 09:27 -0800
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-01-21 16:36 -0600
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-21 19:08 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-01-22 12:29 -0600
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-01-22 10:56 -0800
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) mausg@mail.com - 2016-01-22 19:08 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-01-22 11:22 -0800
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) mausg@mail.com - 2016-01-22 20:00 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-01-22 12:43 -0800
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-01-23 09:07 -0600
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-01-22 14:24 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-01-23 09:11 -0600
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-01-23 11:27 -0600
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-01-24 11:14 -0600
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-01-19 17:22 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-19 18:47 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-01-20 14:04 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-20 18:38 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-01-21 14:12 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-19 18:15 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-20 17:33 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "James Green" <667755@gmail.com> - 2016-01-21 11:47 +1100
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) mausg@mail.com - 2016-01-21 11:54 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-21 08:52 -0800
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-21 11:29 -0600
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-01-21 16:39 -0600
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-01-23 14:46 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) mausg@mail.com - 2016-01-23 17:14 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-01-23 18:50 -0800
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "kipg" <io@nospam.com> - 2016-01-24 04:25 +1100
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-01-23 14:44 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) mausg@mail.com - 2016-01-23 16:54 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-23 15:01 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "kipg" <io@nospam.com> - 2016-01-24 07:45 +1100
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-01-24 15:07 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-24 10:43 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-01-24 11:21 -0800
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-24 11:36 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) mausg@mail.com - 2016-01-24 20:23 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-01-26 14:21 +0100
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "Orange" <oq7755@gmail.com> - 2016-01-27 04:33 +1100
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "kipg" <io@nospam.com> - 2016-01-25 04:55 +1100
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "kipg" <io@nospam.com> - 2016-01-24 07:34 +1100
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "kipg" <io@nospam.com> - 2016-01-24 04:19 +1100
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-16 16:46 -0800
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2016-01-17 03:45 +1100
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-16 15:32 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-16 20:57 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-01-17 09:54 +1100
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-16 20:08 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-01-17 13:57 +1100
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-16 23:33 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-01-17 16:09 +1100
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-17 00:40 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-01-17 17:40 +1100
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-17 07:19 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-01-17 19:18 +1100
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-17 06:40 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-01-17 14:12 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-17 11:59 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-01-18 05:19 +1100
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Jon Elson <elson@pico-systems.com> - 2016-01-24 19:41 -0600
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-01-25 13:09 +1100
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-01-25 14:55 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-01-25 11:22 -0600
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-01-25 16:04 -0600
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-01-26 09:55 +1100
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-01-25 19:41 -0600
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-25 19:46 -0800
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-01-25 20:31 -0800
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-26 06:42 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-01-26 11:39 -0600
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-26 19:23 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-01-26 21:42 -0600
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Stan Barr <plan.b@bluesomatic.org> - 2016-01-27 08:27 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-27 06:19 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-01-28 15:56 -0600
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-26 17:43 -0800
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-01-26 16:05 +1100
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-25 19:40 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-17 14:19 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-01-17 19:10 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-17 19:27 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-01-17 23:45 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-18 00:54 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "James Green" <667755@gmail.com> - 2016-01-18 17:02 +1100
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-01-18 16:30 -0600
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-18 18:17 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-17 19:24 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Lawrence Statton <lawrence@senguio.mx> - 2016-01-17 08:18 -0600
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-01-17 23:21 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-01-18 04:45 +1100
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-19 12:34 -0800
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-19 18:51 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-01-20 14:12 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) pechter@pechter.dyndns.org (William Pechter) - 2016-01-20 17:13 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-01-21 14:47 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-01-21 11:11 -0600
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-20 18:40 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-01-21 14:47 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-01-21 11:10 -0600
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-21 11:41 -0600
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) pechter@pechter.dyndns.org (William Pechter) - 2016-01-21 20:35 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-01-21 16:49 -0600
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-01-21 16:41 -0600
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-21 10:40 -0800
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) pechter@pechter.dyndns.org (William Pechter) - 2016-01-21 20:37 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-01-21 16:02 -0600
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-21 18:42 -0600
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "James Green" <667755@gmail.com> - 2016-01-22 13:29 +1100
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "Jack Myers" <jmyers@n6wuz.net> - 2016-01-22 21:09 -0800
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-21 16:04 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-01-22 13:55 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-21 09:16 -0800
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-21 18:34 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-17 06:36 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-17 12:14 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-17 11:49 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-01-18 04:57 +1100
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-01-17 23:19 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-17 09:22 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-01-17 15:26 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-17 12:02 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-01-18 05:24 +1100
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-17 18:13 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "879" <879@nospam.com> - 2016-01-18 10:35 +1100
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-01-18 12:33 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-18 08:53 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-01-19 13:37 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-01-18 16:32 -0600
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-01-19 11:41 +1100
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-01-18 19:56 -0600
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-18 21:12 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-01-19 00:07 -0600
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-01-19 14:06 +1100
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-19 07:36 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-01-19 13:37 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-01-19 15:47 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-21 08:20 -0800
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-01-18 20:32 -0600
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-01-19 14:11 +1100
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-01-19 10:15 +0100
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-01-19 20:41 +1100
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-19 07:03 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-01-19 10:34 -0600
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-01-19 07:59 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-01-19 10:19 -0600
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-19 19:16 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-01-20 06:21 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) mausg@mail.com - 2016-01-20 11:41 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-20 12:07 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "James Green" <667755@gmail.com> - 2016-01-21 04:53 +1100
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-20 20:16 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "James Green" <667755@gmail.com> - 2016-01-21 07:46 +1100
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-01-20 15:01 -0600
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "James Green" <667755@gmail.com> - 2016-01-21 08:17 +1100
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-01-20 17:29 -0600
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-20 21:22 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "James Green" <667755@gmail.com> - 2016-01-21 08:52 +1100
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-20 17:33 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) mausg@mail.com - 2016-01-21 11:46 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-21 07:02 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-21 10:33 -0800
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-20 18:36 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-01-19 14:24 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-17 12:01 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-01-18 05:23 +1100
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-01-18 04:37 +1100
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-17 09:22 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-17 06:34 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-01-18 04:34 +1100
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) mausg@mail.com - 2016-01-17 11:42 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-17 06:54 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-17 07:09 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-17 07:26 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-01-18 04:52 +1100
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-01-17 14:08 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Stan Barr <plan.b@bluesomatic.org> - 2016-01-17 15:50 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-17 11:58 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-01-17 19:08 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-17 19:26 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-17 19:08 -0600
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-01-17 23:33 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-19 10:32 -0600
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-01-21 17:41 -0800
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-01-22 03:38 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-01-22 17:34 -0800
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-01-23 05:06 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-01-23 15:29 -0800
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-01-25 02:15 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-01-17 23:20 -0800
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-01-18 08:53 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-01-18 10:22 +0100
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-01-18 09:58 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-18 07:45 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-01-18 16:38 -0600
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-18 17:59 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-01-19 11:42 +1100
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-01-18 20:37 -0600
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-01-19 14:20 +1100
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-18 07:45 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-01-19 04:18 +1100
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-01-18 18:51 +0100
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Mike Spencer <mds@bogus.nodomain.nowhere> - 2016-01-19 00:41 -0400
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-01-18 23:58 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-19 07:36 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-01-19 14:27 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-19 14:38 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-01-19 18:33 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-01-19 16:28 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-01-19 13:57 -0800
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-01-19 16:46 -0600
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2016-01-21 17:50 -0800
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-21 21:43 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-21 08:53 -0800
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) mausg@mail.com - 2016-01-19 22:14 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-20 17:33 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-01-20 17:35 -0600
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-01-21 07:21 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-21 08:26 -0800
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-21 11:31 -0600
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-19 18:52 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-19 16:36 -0600
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-01-19 19:27 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-20 17:33 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-21 08:59 -0800
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-21 17:54 -0600
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-21 09:01 -0800
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-21 11:49 -0600
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-19 11:01 -0600
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-01-19 11:19 -0600
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-01-17 23:30 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-01-17 23:32 -0800
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2016-01-18 19:06 -0600
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-01-18 20:39 -0600
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-17 11:57 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-01-17 23:02 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-01-18 15:40 +1100
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2016-01-18 15:55 +1100
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-01-18 15:57 +1100
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Jon Elson <elson@pico-systems.com> - 2016-01-24 19:37 -0600
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-01-25 13:05 +1100
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-24 21:59 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-01-16 22:57 -0600
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-01-17 16:17 +1100
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-19 12:27 -0800
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) pechter@pechter.dyndns.org (William Pechter) - 2016-01-19 23:24 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-19 19:43 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-21 09:10 -0800
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Stan Barr <plan.b@bluesomatic.org> - 2016-01-17 08:15 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-17 06:42 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Stan Barr <plan.b@bluesomatic.org> - 2016-01-17 15:40 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-01-17 23:24 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-19 12:36 -0800
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-01-19 20:47 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-01-19 16:28 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Stan Barr <plan.b@bluesomatic.org> - 2016-01-20 08:18 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-01-18 20:21 -0600
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-01-18 15:08 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-18 11:15 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-01-18 17:44 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-01-18 19:08 -0600
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-01-16 17:07 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-01-17 09:56 +1100
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-16 16:30 -0800
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-01-17 15:26 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2016-01-18 05:13 +1100
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-01-19 13:36 -0600
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-01-19 13:37 -0600
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-01-19 14:35 -0600
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) jgk@panix.com (Joe keane) - 2016-01-21 17:05 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-21 12:18 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-01-21 16:35 -0600
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-01-22 13:55 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-01-15 17:26 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-01-15 22:20 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) mausg@mail.com - 2016-01-16 10:42 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-16 06:04 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-01-16 11:39 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-16 07:23 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-01-16 13:09 +0100
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-01-17 03:41 +1100
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2016-01-14 11:02 -0800
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-14 11:56 -0800
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-14 18:57 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-14 16:08 -0800
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-14 18:03 -0800
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-14 21:41 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-01-15 14:51 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Stephen Wolstenholme <steve@easynn.com> - 2016-01-15 15:43 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2016-01-16 14:09 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-01-15 15:06 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-15 17:53 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-01-15 07:04 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "jack" <jkl8976@nospam.com> - 2016-01-15 19:29 +1100
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-15 06:43 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-01-15 15:52 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) floyd@apaflo.com (Floyd L. Davidson) - 2016-01-14 16:00 -0900
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-01-15 15:05 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-01-18 20:04 -0600
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-18 21:17 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-01-19 07:57 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Jon Elson <elson@pico-systems.com> - 2016-01-24 19:53 -0600
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2016-01-15 15:01 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-01-15 17:53 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) mausg@mail.com - 2016-01-14 21:17 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-13 18:08 -0800
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-01-13 21:25 -0500
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-14 07:31 -0800
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-01-14 18:46 +0100
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-01-14 10:43 -0800
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Jon Elson <elson@pico-systems.com> - 2016-01-24 20:00 -0600
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-01-14 00:31 -0800
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-01-17 03:30 -0600
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2016-01-14 01:35 +0000
Re: Shout out to Grace Hopper (State of the Union) mausg@mail.com - 2016-01-14 14:02 +0000
Page 5 of 20 — ← Prev page 1 … 3 4 [5] 6 7 … 20 Next page →
| From | JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-24 11:14 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <id1aab9pr1dv9ta2t28naa05dcr6blg497@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #157413 |
On Sat, 23 Jan 2016 11:27:36 -0600, Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> wrote: >On 1/23/2016 9:11 AM, JimP wrote: >> On Fri, 22 Jan 2016 14:24:56 -0500, Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> >> wrote: >>> On Fri, 22 Jan 2016, JimP wrote: >>> >>>> On Thu, 21 Jan 2016 19:08:51 -0500, "J. Clarke" >>>> <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> In article <p9n2ab9aarjl4j12a45md9ahhh4atgpn7m@4ax.com>, solosam90 >>>>> @gmail.com says... >>>>>> >>>>>> On Thu, 21 Jan 2016 09:27:42 -0800 (PST), hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote: >>>>>>> On Tuesday, January 19, 2016 at 8:40:37 PM UTC-5, JimP wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Patton apparently wanted to de-Nazify Germany and then partner with >>>>>>>> them to take on the Soviets. He should have paid better attention to >>>>>>>> the meant grinder that was the Eastern Front. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Patton didn't care about "meat grinders". >>>>>>> >>>>>>> IIRC, Patton also felt that war with the Soviets was inevitable, >>>>>>> so he felt the times were good to take them on. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Fortunately, cooler heads did recognize the meat grinder of the >>>>>>> Eastern Front and had no desire to repeat it. >>>>>> >>>>>> The Soviets had better thanks by the end of WW2 as well. The T-34/85. >>>>> >>>>> I don't think that there was ever a time during the WWII era when the >>>>> Soviet union did _not_ have better thanks than those that the US was >>>>> using at the end of the war. And by the end the IS-2 was in service and >>>>> the IS-3 in production. >>>>> >>>>> OTOH, I suspect that the US could have achieved air dominance without >>>>> much difficulty, and air dominance pretty much neutralizes armor. >>>> >>>> Well, I wasn't much impressed by the B1 and the B-2. But they could >>>> punch holes in the PKW II and III. The Panther, as far as I remember, >>>> could stand up to them. >>>> >>>> The Sherman, a medium tank, was more a joke and got many crews killed. >>>> I have seen a documentary on the Panther tank. The Panther Regimental >>>> commander they interviewed for the documentary said not only was he >>>> not afraid of the Sherman Firefly, those who put men into the Sherman >>>> should have been shot. >>>> >>> What was Donald Sutherland's line in "Kelly's Heroes"? Something about >>> the only place a specific German tank was vulnerable was from behind? >>> >>> Michael >> >> Yes. Five shermans take on one tiger. 2-3 crews get killed while the >> other 2 try to get behind it and fire into its rear armor. >> >The American attitude was, we produced lots of Shermans, and we had >lots of crews. Shermans were reliable and cheap. Tigers were few and >costly. > >Of course, the Sherman was designed for rolling support of infantry, >it wasn't designed (nor particularly suited.. underarmored and >undergunned) for tank to tank battles. Crews tried to improvise >additional armor but that increased the weight and reliability >suffered. It wasn't until close to the end of the war that the >better-suited Pershing tanks began to appear. But unit commanders used the Shermans in tank vs. tank battles. The M-8 tank destroyer, with one inch of frontal armor, was also used in tank battles. It had a bigger gun than the Sherman, but poor armor. One documentary I've watched talked to the M-8 tank destroyer unit commanders and they tried to avoid getting in tank battles unless they could get in turret down by getting behind a hill and just poke up their turrets, -- JimP.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-19 17:22 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <n7mcqj$ceb$4@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #157053 |
Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> writes: > On 19-Jan-16 14:24, hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote: >> Dave Garland wrote: >>> The USSR suffered far more damage from WW II than any of the >>> western allies. The USSR was the primary target of the Germans, and >>> threw everything they had against them (materials and bodies). And >>> (not without reason) the USSR feared that the US would attack them >>> after WW II. >> >> While the USSR feared the US would attack them after WW II, that fear >> was utterly groundless. > > There were many in the US that publicly argued for a preemptive strike > before the USSR got its own nukes, and it was not unreasonable to worry > that a US president might have done so. > > After they got them and everyone fully understood MAD, things settled > into the Cold War, which ironically became one of the most > peaceful--though tense--periods in human history. > > Unfortunately, religious fanatics are inherently immune to logic, so we > need to find another way to deal with them--both at home and abroad. > >> Yes, the USSR suffered terrible damage and loss of live, but it made >> no difference. If Stalin ordered them to go war, they would go to >> war. > > Stalin didn't _want_ a war, but he had good reason to be paranoid after > being betrayed by Hitler; he trusted MAD more than NATO's promises of > non-aggression, just like we trusted MAD more than his promises. > > Reagan's strategy of goading the Soviets into spending themselves into > bankruptcy was ingenious. Too bad his successors didn't understand they > were supposed to end that after the USSR collapsed and instead have all > gone looking for new enemies to replace them. Oh, his successors understood alright. Remember the talk about a peace dividend? But if you're a big corporation making money selling weapons, you're going to find a way to keep sales growing. -- Dan Espen
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-19 18:47 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <MPG.3108952d14b40110989e4a@news.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #157060 |
In article <n7mcqj$ceb$4@dont-email.me>, despen@verizon.net says... > > Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> writes: > > > On 19-Jan-16 14:24, hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote: > >> Dave Garland wrote: > >>> The USSR suffered far more damage from WW II than any of the > >>> western allies. The USSR was the primary target of the Germans, and > >>> threw everything they had against them (materials and bodies). And > >>> (not without reason) the USSR feared that the US would attack them > >>> after WW II. > >> > >> While the USSR feared the US would attack them after WW II, that fear > >> was utterly groundless. > > > > There were many in the US that publicly argued for a preemptive strike > > before the USSR got its own nukes, and it was not unreasonable to worry > > that a US president might have done so. > > > > After they got them and everyone fully understood MAD, things settled > > into the Cold War, which ironically became one of the most > > peaceful--though tense--periods in human history. > > > > Unfortunately, religious fanatics are inherently immune to logic, so we > > need to find another way to deal with them--both at home and abroad. > > > >> Yes, the USSR suffered terrible damage and loss of live, but it made > >> no difference. If Stalin ordered them to go war, they would go to > >> war. > > > > Stalin didn't _want_ a war, but he had good reason to be paranoid after > > being betrayed by Hitler; he trusted MAD more than NATO's promises of > > non-aggression, just like we trusted MAD more than his promises. > > > > Reagan's strategy of goading the Soviets into spending themselves into > > bankruptcy was ingenious. Too bad his successors didn't understand they > > were supposed to end that after the USSR collapsed and instead have all > > gone looking for new enemies to replace them. > > Oh, his successors understood alright. Remember the talk about > a peace dividend? > > But if you're a big corporation making money selling weapons, you're > going to find a way to keep sales growing. Unless you're Grumman, North American, Douglas, . . .
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-20 14:04 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <KtMny.142965$kN.38329@fx11.iad> |
| In reply to | #157080 |
"J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> writes: >In article <n7mcqj$ceb$4@dont-email.me>, despen@verizon.net says... > >Unless you're Grumman, North American, Douglas, . . . Who all still exist, as part of Lockheed, Northrop and Boeing.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-20 18:38 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <MPG.3109e484da775ccf989e69@news.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #157154 |
In article <KtMny.142965$kN.38329@fx11.iad>, scott@slp53.sl.home says... > > "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> writes: > >In article <n7mcqj$ceb$4@dont-email.me>, despen@verizon.net says... > > > > >Unless you're Grumman, North American, Douglas, . . . > > Who all still exist, as part of Lockheed, Northrop and Boeing. Tell that to the people who used to work for them.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-21 14:12 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <4H5oy.161767$MN2.61120@fx07.iad> |
| In reply to | #157232 |
"J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> writes: >In article <KtMny.142965$kN.38329@fx11.iad>, scott@slp53.sl.home says... >> >> "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> writes: >> >In article <n7mcqj$ceb$4@dont-email.me>, despen@verizon.net says... >> >> > >> >Unless you're Grumman, North American, Douglas, . . . >> >> Who all still exist, as part of Lockheed, Northrop and Boeing. > >Tell that to the people who used to work for them. > Hey, I'm not defending the consolidation, I think ultimately it was disasterous for the future of the aerospace program. Gone are the days when a prototype aircraft was flying within 2 years of RFP. I once wrote a post listing the aerospace industry consolidation; the current first tier have pretty much absorbed everyone else. I was very disappointed when Scaled Composites was sold to Lockmart.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-19 18:15 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <MPG.31088db713ac9bce989e49@news.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #157053 |
In article <n7masd$jgo$1@dont-email.me>, stephen@sprunk.org says... > > On 19-Jan-16 14:24, hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote: > > Dave Garland wrote: > >> The USSR suffered far more damage from WW II than any of the > >> western allies. The USSR was the primary target of the Germans, and > >> threw everything they had against them (materials and bodies). And > >> (not without reason) the USSR feared that the US would attack them > >> after WW II. > > > > While the USSR feared the US would attack them after WW II, that fear > > was utterly groundless. > > There were many in the US that publicly argued for a preemptive strike > before the USSR got its own nukes, and it was not unreasonable to worry > that a US president might have done so. > > After they got them and everyone fully understood MAD, things settled > into the Cold War, which ironically became one of the most > peaceful--though tense--periods in human history. > > Unfortunately, religious fanatics are inherently immune to logic, so we > need to find another way to deal with them--both at home and abroad. > > > Yes, the USSR suffered terrible damage and loss of live, but it made > > no difference. If Stalin ordered them to go war, they would go to > > war. > > Stalin didn't _want_ a war, but he had good reason to be paranoid after > being betrayed by Hitler; he trusted MAD more than NATO's promises of > non-aggression, just like we trusted MAD more than his promises. > > Reagan's strategy of goading the Soviets into spending themselves into > bankruptcy was ingenious. Too bad his successors didn't understand they > were supposed to end that after the USSR collapsed and instead have all > gone looking for new enemies to replace them. > > S I think that part of the problem is that there was a lesson in economics to be learned from WWII and different political groups got different parts of the lesson--the military was built up and the economy subsequently boomed, there was huge government borrowing and the economy subsequently boomed, there was a war and the economy subsequently boomed, so the various idiotpoliticians are borrowing massively and there's no boom, but they keep borrowing, the military has been built up hugely and there's no boom, but they keep building, there have been numerous wars and no boom, but they keep starting wars. They don't get that the reason for the boom was the creation of pent-up consumer demand due to rationing and a significant supply of consumer wealth from several years of nearly full employment with nothing much available on which to spend their wages. The borrowing and the miltary and the war were the circumstances that brought about that situation in the absence of the high employment and low availability of goods they achieve nothing other than costing money.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-20 17:33 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <1142796685.475020384.368699.peter_flass-yahoo.com@news.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #157053 |
Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> wrote: > On 19-Jan-16 14:24, hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote: >> Dave Garland wrote: >>> The USSR suffered far more damage from WW II than any of the >>> western allies. The USSR was the primary target of the Germans, and >>> threw everything they had against them (materials and bodies). And >>> (not without reason) the USSR feared that the US would attack them >>> after WW II. >> >> While the USSR feared the US would attack them after WW II, that fear >> was utterly groundless. > > There were many in the US that publicly argued for a preemptive strike > before the USSR got its own nukes, and it was not unreasonable to worry > that a US president might have done so. > > After they got them and everyone fully understood MAD, things settled > into the Cold War, which ironically became one of the most > peaceful--though tense--periods in human history. > > Unfortunately, religious fanatics are inherently immune to logic, so we > need to find another way to deal with them--both at home and abroad. > >> Yes, the USSR suffered terrible damage and loss of live, but it made >> no difference. If Stalin ordered them to go war, they would go to >> war. > > Stalin didn't _want_ a war, but he had good reason to be paranoid after > being betrayed by Hitler; he trusted MAD more than NATO's promises of > non-aggression, just like we trusted MAD more than his promises. > If Hitler hadn't attacked Russisa, then Stalin would have attacked Germany in a year or so. Maybe his paranoia was in assuming that everyone was as crazy as he was. > Reagan's strategy of goading the Soviets into spending themselves into > bankruptcy was ingenious. Too bad his successors didn't understand they > were supposed to end that after the USSR collapsed and instead have all > gone looking for new enemies to replace them. > > S > -- Pete
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "James Green" <667755@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-21 11:47 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <dgao4lF79vU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #157218 |
"Peter Flass" <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:1142796685.475020384.368699.peter_flass-yahoo.com@news.eternal-september.org... > Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> wrote: >> On 19-Jan-16 14:24, hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote: >>> Dave Garland wrote: >>>> The USSR suffered far more damage from WW II than any of the >>>> western allies. The USSR was the primary target of the Germans, and >>>> threw everything they had against them (materials and bodies). And >>>> (not without reason) the USSR feared that the US would attack them >>>> after WW II. >>> >>> While the USSR feared the US would attack them after WW II, that fear >>> was utterly groundless. >> >> There were many in the US that publicly argued for a preemptive strike >> before the USSR got its own nukes, and it was not unreasonable to worry >> that a US president might have done so. >> >> After they got them and everyone fully understood MAD, things settled >> into the Cold War, which ironically became one of the most >> peaceful--though tense--periods in human history. >> >> Unfortunately, religious fanatics are inherently immune to logic, so we >> need to find another way to deal with them--both at home and abroad. >> >>> Yes, the USSR suffered terrible damage and loss of live, but it made >>> no difference. If Stalin ordered them to go war, they would go to >>> war. >> >> Stalin didn't _want_ a war, but he had good reason to be paranoid after >> being betrayed by Hitler; he trusted MAD more than NATO's promises of >> non-aggression, just like we trusted MAD more than his promises. >> > > If Hitler hadn't attacked Russisa, then Stalin would have attacked Germany > in a year or so. I don’t believe that and it wasn’t even possible given all the countries between Russia and Germany anyway. > Maybe his paranoia was in assuming that everyone was as crazy as he was. He actually assumed that Hitler wouldn’t attack Russia and went into one hell of a funk when he was proved wrong on that. >> Reagan's strategy of goading the Soviets into spending themselves into >> bankruptcy was ingenious. Too bad his successors didn't understand they >> were supposed to end that after the USSR collapsed and instead have all >> gone looking for new enemies to replace them.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | mausg@mail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-21 11:54 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <slrnna1hnj.199.mausg@smaus.org> |
| In reply to | #157218 |
On 2016-01-20, Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote: > Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> wrote: >> On 19-Jan-16 14:24, hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote: >>> Dave Garland wrote: >> non-aggression, just like we trusted MAD more than his promises. >> > > If Hitler hadn't attacked Russisa, then Stalin would have attacked Germany > in a year or so. Maybe his paranoia was in assuming that everyone was as > crazy as he was. That is a major point that the German nationalists make, (not just the Neo-Nazis, who are starting to bloom again), that as the German Army advanced into Galicia, they found airstrips being prepared. After the disastrous Soviet-Polish war, the soviets had decided that it was better to develope socialism in one country, rather than violently export it, and that was Stalin's policy to the end. Trotsky opposed that, fled the country, and was murdered in Mexico later, no great loss. > >> Reagan's strategy of goading the Soviets into spending themselves into >> bankruptcy was ingenious. Too bad his successors didn't understand they >> were supposed to end that after the USSR collapsed and instead have all >> gone looking for new enemies to replace them. >> >> S >> > > > -- greymaus . . ...
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-21 08:52 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <10a0fea2-b6a9-4fce-abec-da84b0d196f9@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #157053 |
On Tuesday, January 19, 2016 at 4:49:40 PM UTC-5, Stephen Sprunk wrote: > There were many in the US that publicly argued for a preemptive strike > before the USSR got its own nukes, and it was not unreasonable to worry > that a US president might have done so. When the USSR got its own nukes, the US capability was extremely limited--it had very few bombs in working conditions, and not much of an air force to deliver them. Further, the USSR got its own bomb fairly quickly after the war ended, before the real beicose rhetoric of the Cold War began--the rhetoric was ramped up after the Soviets got the bomb, and especially after Korea. The Soviets, thanks to Stalin, were very paranoid. The Soviets were repeatedly told during WW II that the U.S. was evil and that the Soviets had to make a temporary appeasement to fight the Germans. (Ref. Victor Kravchenko, "I Chose Freedom"). > After they got them and everyone fully understood MAD, things settled > into the Cold War, which ironically became one of the most > peaceful--though tense--periods in human history. Generally so, though the veterans (and their families) of Korea and Vietnam might not agree. > Unfortunately, religious fanatics are inherently immune to logic, so we > need to find another way to deal with them--both at home and abroad. Sadly, the experience of WW II and dealing with fervent Nazi's and the Japanese was terribly difficult. German POWs who were ardent Nazi's (ie SS) had to be isolated from plain troops (Wermacht). They would kill their own people in a blink if they suspected any disloyalty. Japanese soldiers would not surrender, ever, and were willing and able to psych themselves into enduring horrific bombings yet keep fighting. In the U.S. today, we're not doing much better. On the one hand are the hawks who just want to invade or bomb en masse, without clear thinking about it (e.g. Bush and Iraq), which only makes things worse. On the other hand, the doves really think offering the olive branch will make the fanactics happy and lovey-dovey; and that won't work either. (It amazes me how many humanitarian workers go into those hostile zones, only to get killed. Then their families blame the US govt for not protecting them.) The incompetence in invading Iraq to take out Saddam Hussein was utterly amazing. The stories I heard from veterans who served there... They learned NOTHING from Vietnam, and just repeated the screwups. Take Syria. Yes, their dictator is bad and their civil war is very ugly. But is it REALLY in our interest to interfere? Wisely, we have stayed away. > Stalin didn't _want_ a war, but he had good reason to be paranoid after > being betrayed by Hitler; he trusted MAD more than NATO's promises of > non-aggression, just like we trusted MAD more than his promises. Stalin died before MAD really became effective, at the time of his death, nuclear weapons and ways to deliver them were still quite limited. Stalin didn't trust anyone. IIRC, he planned to double-cross Hitler all along, only Hitler beat him to it. Stalin made the pact just to buy time to build up his army. [pure speculation:] Sometimes I wonder if Stalin wasn't actually murdered, he was getting even more nuts in his last years, ordering ever more purges that were hurting the country (like killing off all the doctors). Perhaps he was planning to use his nukes and his underlings (all thugs themselves), realized the folly and took him out. I think it's more accurate to say Kruscheve believed in MAD. > Reagan's strategy of goading the Soviets into spending themselves into > bankruptcy was ingenious. Too bad his successors didn't understand they > were supposed to end that after the USSR collapsed and instead have all > gone looking for new enemies to replace them. Unfortunately, in politics, creating enemies is a good way to get and stay elected. It worked very well for the Republicans in the 1950s, accusing everyone of being 'soft on communism'. J. Edgar Hoover did the same thing. He'd go before Congress and quietly talk about crime issues and how the FBI was working so hard to fight it. But he was careful not to paint crime as too bad as to have Congress question his effectiveness. He always got what he wanted. (his blackmail files didn't hurt either). Hoover was a P/R genius with the general public. (An agent who dared take personal credit for solving a case instead of crediting Hoover's leadership was in deep trouble.) By the way, Hoover wasn't personally interested in law and order or the protection of society. If he felt an area was too tough for the FBI to handle (for whatever reason), he wouldn't go near it. In the Nixon years, a staff member, Houston, presented a plan to control rioting. Hoover wouldn't touch it because he saw it as political dynamite, not that he objected to the plan or going after its targets that he hated. Hoover was out for Hoover.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-21 11:29 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <n7r4ck$pfk$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #157282 |
On 21-Jan-16 10:52, hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote: > The Soviets, thanks to Stalin, were very paranoid. The Soviets were > repeatedly told during WW II that the U.S. was evil and that the > Soviets had to make a temporary appeasement to fight the Germans. > (Ref. Victor Kravchenko, "I Chose Freedom"). Of course; demonizing capitalists is standard communist propaganda and had nothing to do with WWII, other than the need to explain why they were temporarily cooperating with us, i.e. fascists were even worse. > Stephen Sprunk wrote: >> After they got them and everyone fully understood MAD, things >> settled into the Cold War, which ironically became one of the most >> peaceful--though tense--periods in human history. > > Generally so, though the veterans (and their families) of Korea and > Vietnam might not agree. Compared to the average rate of war fatalities prior to WWII, Korea and Vietnam were non-events. Obviously, for those directly affected by Korea or Vietnam (or Iraq or Afghanistan), they were tragedies, but thousands of tragedies is better (less bad?) than millions. > The incompetence in invading Iraq to take out Saddam Hussein was > utterly amazing. The stories I heard from veterans who served > there... They learned NOTHING from Vietnam, and just repeated the > screwups. > > Take Syria. Yes, their dictator is bad and their civil war is very > ugly. But is it REALLY in our interest to interfere? Wisely, we > have stayed away. Agreed. One of the lessons politicians _should_ have learned by now is that every time we get involved in the Middle East, the result is even worse than whatever caused us to intervene in the first place. > Stalin didn't trust anyone. IIRC, he planned to double-cross Hitler > all along, only Hitler beat him to it. Stalin made the pact just to > buy time to build up his army. Stalin trusted Hitler and _didn't_ build up his army, and one of the reasons the Soviets took such heavy losses is they were completely unprepared when Hitler attacked. They had to build an army, virtually from scratch, while on the defensive and losing ground every day. That history is what _made_ Stalin paranoid; he assumed we'd betray him like Hitler had. The Cold War started because he was preparing for when we did; we interpreted his defenses as preparation to invade Europe, and he interpreted our defenses as preparation to invade Russia. Lather, rinse, repeat. S -- Stephen Sprunk "God does not play dice." --Albert Einstein CCIE #3723 "God is an inveterate gambler, and He throws the K5SSS dice at every possible opportunity." --Stephen Hawking
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-21 16:39 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <mdn2abdaj5t9melt2a4khj1rc3cb3t9op1@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #157294 |
On Thu, 21 Jan 2016 11:29:29 -0600, Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> wrote: >On 21-Jan-16 10:52, hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote: >> The Soviets, thanks to Stalin, were very paranoid. The Soviets were >> repeatedly told during WW II that the U.S. was evil and that the >> Soviets had to make a temporary appeasement to fight the Germans. >> (Ref. Victor Kravchenko, "I Chose Freedom"). > >Of course; demonizing capitalists is standard communist propaganda and >had nothing to do with WWII, other than the need to explain why they >were temporarily cooperating with us, i.e. fascists were even worse. > >> Stephen Sprunk wrote: >>> After they got them and everyone fully understood MAD, things >>> settled into the Cold War, which ironically became one of the most >>> peaceful--though tense--periods in human history. >> >> Generally so, though the veterans (and their families) of Korea and >> Vietnam might not agree. > >Compared to the average rate of war fatalities prior to WWII, Korea and >Vietnam were non-events. > >Obviously, for those directly affected by Korea or Vietnam (or Iraq or >Afghanistan), they were tragedies, but thousands of tragedies is better >(less bad?) than millions. > >> The incompetence in invading Iraq to take out Saddam Hussein was >> utterly amazing. The stories I heard from veterans who served >> there... They learned NOTHING from Vietnam, and just repeated the >> screwups. >> >> Take Syria. Yes, their dictator is bad and their civil war is very >> ugly. But is it REALLY in our interest to interfere? Wisely, we >> have stayed away. > >Agreed. One of the lessons politicians _should_ have learned by now is >that every time we get involved in the Middle East, the result is even >worse than whatever caused us to intervene in the first place. > >> Stalin didn't trust anyone. IIRC, he planned to double-cross Hitler >> all along, only Hitler beat him to it. Stalin made the pact just to >> buy time to build up his army. > >Stalin trusted Hitler and _didn't_ build up his army, and one of the >reasons the Soviets took such heavy losses is they were completely >unprepared when Hitler attacked. They had to build an army, virtually >from scratch, while on the defensive and losing ground every day. Stalin's murder of many of his generals didn't help either. I've read and seen in documentaries that killing of Soviet generals is why Finland won the early battles against the Soviets. Mannerheim being the Finnish general didn't hurt either. -- JimP.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-23 14:46 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <9uWdnVplReKjDz7LnZ2dnUU78WcAAAAA@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #157324 |
On 21/01/2016 22:39, JimP wrote: > Stalin's murder of many of his generals didn't help either. > > I've read and seen in documentaries that killing of Soviet generals is > why Finland won the early battles against the Soviets. Mannerheim > being the Finnish general didn't hurt either. > Not just the generals were killed, it was practically all the USSR's officers.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | mausg@mail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-23 17:14 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <slrnna7d7d.18i.mausg@smaus.org> |
| In reply to | #157395 |
On 2016-01-23, Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> wrote: > On 21/01/2016 22:39, JimP wrote: >> Stalin's murder of many of his generals didn't help either. >> >> I've read and seen in documentaries that killing of Soviet generals is >> why Finland won the early battles against the Soviets. Mannerheim >> being the Finnish general didn't hurt either. >> > Not just the generals were killed, it was practically all the USSR's > officers. There was a lot of rumors of all that. Tukachevsky was thinking of taking over, however most think his invasion of Poland, and forgeting about the Polish Army was not inspired. Then Gan's treatment of civilians in that war was not hopeful. Most of the officer corps, thanks to Trotsky, was ex-czarist. There was a problem there. -- greymaus . . ...
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-23 18:50 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <87powr6685.fsf@garlic.com> |
| In reply to | #157410 |
mausg@mail.com writes: > There was a lot of rumors of all that. Tukachevsky was thinking of > taking over, however most think his invasion of Poland, and > forgeting about the Polish Army was not inspired. Then Gan's treatment > of civilians in that war was not hopeful. Most of the officer corps, > thanks to Trotsky, was ex-czarist. There was a problem there. Smithsonian channel running greatest war ... started with axis/russian conflict. however they just mentioned that germany had 600,000 industrial workers from vichy france (not slave labor). -- virtualization experience starting Jan1968, online at home since Mar1970
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "kipg" <io@nospam.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-24 04:25 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <dghrcuFootqU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #157395 |
"Andrew Swallow" <am.swallow@btinternet.com> wrote in message news:9uWdnVplReKjDz7LnZ2dnUU78WcAAAAA@giganews.com... > On 21/01/2016 22:39, JimP wrote: >> Stalin's murder of many of his generals didn't help either. >> >> I've read and seen in documentaries that killing of Soviet generals is >> why Finland won the early battles against the Soviets. Mannerheim >> being the Finnish general didn't hurt either. >> > Not just the generals were killed, it was practically all the USSR's > officers. That's radically overstated. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Purge#Purge_of_the_army
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-23 14:44 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <9uWdnVtlReIxDD7LnZ2dnUU78WednZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #157282 |
On 21/01/2016 16:52, hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
{snip}
> [pure speculation:] Sometimes I wonder if Stalin wasn't actually
> murdered, he was getting even more nuts in his last years, ordering
> ever more purges that were hurting the country (like killing off
> all the doctors). Perhaps he was planning to use his nukes and
> his underlings (all thugs themselves), realized the folly and
> took him out.
Stalin being killed deliberately is a view of many people in Russia. He
was killed in his sleep to prevent him from calling his guards.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | mausg@mail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-23 16:54 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <slrnna7c2j.18i.mausg@smaus.org> |
| In reply to | #157394 |
On 2016-01-23, Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> wrote:
> On 21/01/2016 16:52, hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
> {snip}
>
>> [pure speculation:] Sometimes I wonder if Stalin wasn't actually
>> murdered, he was getting even more nuts in his last years, ordering
>> ever more purges that were hurting the country (like killing off
>> all the doctors). Perhaps he was planning to use his nukes and
>> his underlings (all thugs themselves), realized the folly and
>> took him out.
>
> Stalin being killed deliberately is a view of many people in Russia. He
> was killed in his sleep to prevent him from calling his guards.
Thats Russian politics.
Anyone have problems with that?
There was a story that at the end, he started to be suspicious of
his doctors, wwho happened to be Jewish. Whatever about being Jewish,
not trusting your doctors is not a long term health idea.
--
greymaus
.
.
...
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-01-23 15:01 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <519175334.475271428.207126.peter_flass-yahoo.com@news.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #157406 |
<mausg@mail.com> wrote:
> On 2016-01-23, Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> wrote:
>> On 21/01/2016 16:52, hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
>> {snip}
>>
>>> [pure speculation:] Sometimes I wonder if Stalin wasn't actually
>>> murdered, he was getting even more nuts in his last years, ordering
>>> ever more purges that were hurting the country (like killing off
>>> all the doctors). Perhaps he was planning to use his nukes and
>>> his underlings (all thugs themselves), realized the folly and
>>> took him out.
>>
>> Stalin being killed deliberately is a view of many people in Russia. He
>> was killed in his sleep to prevent him from calling his guards.
>
> Thats Russian politics.
> Anyone have problems with that?
> There was a story that at the end, he started to be suspicious of
> his doctors, wwho happened to be Jewish. Whatever about being Jewish,
> not trusting your doctors is not a long term health idea.
>
>
I'm hoping Putin will be "retired" soon, although his successor could
always be worse.
--
Pete
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 5 of 20 — ← Prev page 1 … 3 4 [5] 6 7 … 20 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | alt.folklore.computers
csiph-web