Donald Trump Blasts ‘Ungrateful Traitor’ Chelsea Manning


#1

sfgate.com/entertainment/the-wrap/article/Donald-Trump-Blasts-Ungrateful-Traitor-10885473.php


#2

Trump is meant to be doing something useful, isn’t he?


#3

The release from prison sends the wrong message to traitors.


#4

News recently became very interesting. I’m one of those who personally do not like Trump but who believe and hope he can do good for his country. I’m still not impressed so far, but I keep hoping.


#5

I predict that love and harmony at the world level are going to soon flourish. The idea of America first is doomed to failure! Nationalism is one of the biggest follies ever!

“This is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, says the Lord: I will put my laws into their minds, and write them on their hearts, and I will be their God, and they shall be my people. And they shall not teach everyone his fellow or everyone his brother, saying, ‘Know the Lord,’ for all shall know me, from the least of them to the greatest.”
-Hebrews 8:10-11


#6

Exactly. Then to criticize the man who allowed you to be released early and his presidency is not very charitable. It might have been wise to remain quiet about his
criticism so soon after his release.


#7

Really? He’s already taken more than a billion dollars away from the abortion industry. Isn’t that something- well, impressive? I think it’s quite a powerful start!

This kid has been tortured and imprisoned for committing crimes less serious than many in the government who are walking around free as a kite. I have no problem with his sentence being commuted.

Apart from being Twitter-happy, he’s been doing a bunch of useful things. I don’t agree with everything he does, but he is doing things that I agree with as well.

Christ commandment to love God and others like we love ourselves implies that we must first love ourselves. The U.S. government has a responsibility to tend to its citizens and country first, above all other countries. This is not nationalism, this is simply the function of the government. When individuals, families and governments put their own houses in order, only then will we see love and harmony flourishing in the world.

What specifically do you see wrong with President Trump’s commitment to have the U.S. government serve its own citizens first?


#8

I agree with your reply about the responsibility of the U.S. government to its citizens and I am pleased in his response to the abortion industry too and that the White House will have a presence at the pro-life march.


#9

He is and this was.


#10

While I agree with the sentiment, I hope Mr. Trump learns there are things the president needs to address and those which he doesn’t. Continual tweets on smaller issues will eventually cause the important ones to be lost as “background noise”.


#11

Larger, materialistic, richer, and more powerful countries have a moral obligation to poorer countries, especially Third-World countries suffering from extreme poverty. The countries of the world need to exist in harmony, even if some like us need to make sacrifices. I simply do not think that the world can sustain itself in this day and age with countries looking out only for themselves through bigoted nationalism.


#12

What is wrong with wanting your citizens to earn a good living? What is wrong with protecting the lives of American citizens? What is wrong with promoting American values? What is wrong with creating an environment in which its more productive and profitable to have jobs here in the USA instead of China and India? What is wrong with ending the term “free trade” and replace it with “fair trade”? What is wrong with lowering corporate taxes so companies like apple reinvest their profits held in other countries an instead invest here in the US? What is wrong with being a chearleader for the American way of life? What is wrong with winning?


#13

It all comes down to morals for the nations of the world work together in harmony and help each other overcome obstacles which each nation faces to promote the welfare of its people. All nations will benefit from worldwide cooperation, unlike worldwide competition where everybody eventually loses.


#14

Another useless platitude, when proof is that competition have done more to help the human condition since the beginning of humans. Where as cooperation always leads to shared misery. There is no example of world cooperation and you cant prove your post even if you tried. But world competition has always proven to be the best way.

What you and other like you want is a one world government harking back to the middle ages. Where 5% of the population lived without worries and the other 95% were peasants. Except you believe that youre so special that you should be part of the 5%.

I thank God every day that Clinton lost and I hope and pray that her whole family sees the inside of a jail cell where they belong.


#15

Amen and Ditto!!


#16

She should have been executed.


#17

I agree that the rich and powerful have a duty to help the poor and powerless. I don’t agree with your characterization of a government protecting its citizens and looking out for its interests as being “bigoted nationalism”. I also find it odd that you claim that materialistic countries have a moral duty of helping others. It seems to simply be a slight towards one of the most charitable countries in the world rather than a reasonable statement.

Now, about the “harmony”- Where does God say that all countries must live in “harmony”? Did the Jews exist in “harmony” with the pagans? Does evil coexist in “harmony” with good? What does this “harmony” consist of? A lack of sovereignty? And who needs to make sacrifices? Because governments rarely sacrifice themselves. Rare is the time when governments reduce the pay to government agents to help others. Or are you talking about governments imposing forced sacrifices on their citizens for the good of the state?

And that’s what it really boils down to. The devil is in the details. Yes, we do have a duty to help the less fortunate. But that has to come from each of us personally- through the Church and other charitable organizations. It must be our individual choice to give, otherwise it is not charity. In fact, government forced charity is not charity at all and in fact destroys the very essence of charity. It seems that that is what you want- not charity, but a FORCED CHARITY which has none of the spiritual benefits and often very little economic benefits for the people receiving it, too.

BTW, why do you think that “Third-World countries” are suffering? Do you think they need more money and supplies? Do you really think that that will solve their problems- Or could it possibly be that their governments are hopelessly corrupt and rather steal and misspend the public funds? Try and give the government of Hati a few billion dollars and see what you’ll get- or the give the poor government of Cuba the same and see is the lot of the Cuban people will really improve. Are you a betting man? If so, I suggest you not bet on it.

Government has a duty to WE THE PEOPLE. It has no duty to other countries, except in some extreme cases of invasion of allies, such as in WWII. The American people, though not perfect and infected with humanistic secularism, are still good and charitable people who will more than happily send funds, supplies and themselves to those in need, inside and outside the country, even if it means sacrifice for them. We don’t need government to impose our personal sacrifices, which are OURS alone to give or not, upon us.

If you think that government working for ITS PEOPLE and allowing them to decide for themselves what to do with the fruits of their labor is “bigoted nationalism” then so be it, but I think that you are very, very mistaken.


#18

Ridiculous. This man was a whistleblower who leaked actions by the state which could be reasonably construed as war crimes. Also, he continues to be a man, per our Catholic beliefs and objective reality.

Trump is wrong on this one (though it is consistent with his personality).


#19

says you.


#20

I would say killing scores of civilians in airstrikes for example as per the Granai incident (and this is a low incident) certainly should raise concerns, especially as the US constantly harps on about other nations bombing civilians. The question arises as to whether it is not ready to be judged by the same standards it applies to others.


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.