He does raise an interesting point, however.
The concept of "games as teachers", or 'Serious Gaming' as it is coming to be known, is drawing a lot of attention, and DEFCON might have a subtle thing to add to that.
Now that I think about it., you notice that DEFCON barely even legitimizes the violence by providing a score. In terms of the score, death = success, but apart from that, it isnt giving us visceral satisfaction(bone cracks and blood splats), nor is it giving us much direct positive reinforcement( "5 million dead, YOU ROCK!").
Now, we know that its a game, and the "lose the least" aspect of it is a part of the "schtick" to us, but what if someone played this game without any preamble or taglines? No sidelong winks with "everybody dies (smileyface)" ? I wonder, if you administered DEFCON to someone in a sort of blind-test, without giving them access to hype or the game mentality behind it, if they would find it subtly disturbing?
Its all very cold, not really fantastic, in the fantasy sense of the word. Almost more like a MAD-sim. Perhaps there is something to learn from it?