On Thu, Mar 10, 2005 at 03:18:00PM -0500, Poor, Edmund W wrote:
Oops, I meant
"Coulter's mistake was in not knowing (or saying) that Canadians served
as soldiers in Vietnam but WERE NOT sent by its GOVERMENT."
However, Coulter's claim was offered in the context of an assertion that
the nation of Canada was once a supportive ally of the United States but
no longer is. International alliances are relationships between or
among states, that is, governments. In this context, the claim only
really makes sense as an assertion about government actions, since the
actions of private individuals cannot constitute (or break) an alliance.
Moreover, this context also associates the presence of Canadians in the
Vietnam conflict with ideological support by the Canadian government for
the United States government's position in that conflict.
I agree, by the way, with the interpretation that she likely made this
claim from memory (remembering that some Canadians fought in Vietnam),
without intent to deliberately deceive, but without checking the facts.
It appears further that when exposed to the facts she expressed disdain
for those who considered the distinction worth making. For the morality
of making rhetoric in this fashion -- which is hardly unique to Ms.
Coulter -- I suggest reference to the recent work of Prof. Harry
Frankfurt of Princeton University.
--
Karl A. Krueger <kkrueger(a)whoi.edu>