Results are out! Find what you need...fast. Get quick advice or join the chat
Hey there Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

Ask a TSR Liberal Democrat

Announcements Posted on
    • 30 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by chaza01)
    I agree on the carrier issue - we should never have scrapped the harrier fleet (and sold it for peanuts).
    I agree

    Apropos to your comment ']Um no we haven't had to use it because...well..no country has laucnhed nukes at us.' That's a bit simplistic, I think we both know that countries were less likely to nuke us BECAUSE we had it. Ie, if they nuked us, they would be nuked also. But then, you could argue that never having it in the first place would remove that risk completely, but that's because frankly, we wouldn't be taken as seriously (not one permanent national security council member does not have nuclear weapons).
    Well I don't think we have to have nukes to be taken seriously, Security Council or not. And no country since the end of the cold war has attacked us with WMD's because they know the global ramifications. Retaliation might not come from us but from one of our allies. Equally destructive all the same.

    If we are going to have it, it is necessary to have 3 submarines, one at least is usually docked/repaired etc. Look, I understand your argument, but I just think given the level of uncertainty facing the world now and in the future, keeping it makes sense. As for the carriers, sounds like they're gonna ditch CATOBAR as its gonna cost 1.8 billion so they'll stick to the f35b - which kinda sucks as operate that aircraft (with its limited range vs f35c) you'll be within range of enemy cruise missiles. Tbh, it would probably make sense to go with CATOBAR and then save money by sticking with some US f/A18s which theyll be selling on the cheap. And then mix them with a few f35s and the treasury is happy.

    There will always be uncertainty in the world, there will probably always be war and destruction and battles. Having nuclear arms is the ultimate trump card and whether it should be used or not is always going to be a hot topic, however I'm not sure that nuclear arms and having nuclear arms should be the be all and end all to war. It is a trump card but having it means that any enemy might go that little bit further to destroy you. Furthermore I very much doubt we would actually use it because of what would happen if we used them. The destruction, then aftermath etc etc. It would be held over us for generations just like many still believe the use of the A Bomb against Japan was wrong.
    Having it is one thing but you should have something unless you're going to use it and I very much doubt we are ever going to use them. However owning them gives the impression we might be ready to and that's very dangerous because it could encourage aggression against us.

    So I really think we should scale back our nuclear arms, if not that reason then to save money. Or for both.
    • 2 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by thunder_chunky)
    .
    Having it is one thing but you should have something unless you're going to use it and I very much doubt we are ever going to use them. However owning them gives the impression we might be ready to and that's very dangerous because it could encourage aggression against us.

    So I really think we should scale back our nuclear arms, if not that reason then to save money. Or for both.
    I disagree that the possession of nuclear somehow makes you more prone to aggression. For starters, it practically eliminates the prospect of ever being invaded (hypothetically speaking, of course- NATO membership and international law covers that mostly. Basically, I think nuclear armaments don't increase chance of attack, if anything the opposite - it's a deterrent, it's not meant to be used, but we have it to ensure nuclear powers adopt the same mentality!
    This debate doesn't have a clear answer. But I think nuclear proliferation is a long way off anyway... At least until the world starts evening out and bit more and the east/west divide dissolves. Cheers
    • 9 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    Will the TSR Liberal Democrats be seeking to reform the coalition with TSR Labour?
    • 15 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by JPKC)
    Will the TSR Liberal Democrats be seeking to reform the coalition with TSR Labour?
    I don't see why you've been negged, it's a fair question!

    I'd like to ask the same of the TSR Lib Dems. If you've negged JPKC, you've obviously seen the question...
    • 32 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by JPKC)
    Will the TSR Liberal Democrats be seeking to reform the coalition with TSR Labour?
    (Original post by Moleman1996)
    I don't see why you've been negged, it's a fair question!

    I'd like to ask the same of the TSR Lib Dems. If you've negged JPKC, you've obviously seen the question...
    I have not negged JPKC, I've tried to neg him recently and I get Please rate this member again

    We are discussing options at the moment
    • 15 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Morgsie)
    I have not negged JPKC

    We are discussing options at the moment
    k, thanks for the answer not accusing you, but somebody has and to be fair to him it was a proper, uninsulting question for a change...
    • 31 followers
    Online

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Moleman1996)
    k, thanks for the answer not accusing you, but somebody has and to be fair to him it was a proper, uninsulting question for a change...
    Your forgetting the concept of JPKC rage in which somebody only has to see his name to rage and neg people.
    • 15 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rakas21)
    Your forgetting the concept of JPKC rage in which somebody only has to see his name to rage and neg people.
    ha ha, true, it's a good job im out of rep today or it might just take hold...
    • 9 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    Lol I' going to have to buy premium membership to hold these stealth negs to account.

    Thanks for the answer. Wasn't expecting anything more detailed, but worth a try.
    • 22 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    Hi there, I have a couple of questions to ask regarding statements made in your election manifesto. The first is that you say 'Patient's care needs will come first' with regards to the NHS - do you believe that the recent Health and Social Care Bill in real life makes profit or the interests of private companies more of a priority in the NHS (and if so whether these now come above patient's care), makes patient's care more of a priority than it was before or has no effect on the priorities within the health service.

    Secondly, you say that you'd 'open up the system so that any child can go to University'. Given that, theoretically, anyone who has been resident in the EU for at least three years, does not already possess an undergraduate degree and is accepted by at least one institution can go to uni, albeit with a heavy debt burden, in what way do you intend to make it more accessible so that any child could attend. For example, would you like to remove/reduce tuition fees so no-one is put off by the debt burden, introduce a loans system for international students, postgraduate degrees and/or second undergraduate degrees, or guarantee entry to all who want it regardless of academic achievement? Also, would your solution to this include a greater involvement of the private sector in the provision of university-level education?
    • 32 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    The TSR Liberal Democrats have received 2 offers to form a Government and we are currently discussing those offers in more detail.
    • 4 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Morgsie)
    The TSR Liberal Democrats have received 2 offers to form a Government and we are currently discussing those offers in more detail.
    You guys have good experiences of coalitions, eh?
    • 32 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by CyclopsRock)
    You guys have good experiences of coalitions, eh?
    We have had experiences in Coalitions but good experience is a different thing.
    • 4 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Morgsie)
    We have had experiences in Coalitions but good experience is a different thing.
    Yeah, that's what Nick said too.
    • 30 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by CyclopsRock)
    You guys have good experiences of coalitions, eh?
    As a party we've had loads in the last two years or so.
    • 32 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    The following people have been selected to be Lib Dem MPs:

    • Morgsie (Leader)
    • Birchington (Deputy Leader)
    • Wizardtop
    • jsb123
    • Mazzini

    • 3 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    Good luck all of you
    • 29 followers
    Online

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by CyclopsRock)
    You guys have good experiences of coalitions, eh?
    We've got plenty of experience in government here.
    • 1 follower
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Birchington)
    We've got plenty of experience in government here.
    Experience doesn't really equate to efficacy though.
    • 4 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    I can't believe you all missed the fact I was joking about your current real life counterparts getting routinely bummed in the barracks by Dave and George.

    Eitherway, Birchy boy, thanks, that's a fascinating document, I didn't know it existed. My first term was in 2005. Christ, I'm an old coot.
Updated: March 11, 2013
New on TSR

So how did you do?

Come into the GCSE forum to share your grades

Article updates
Reputation gems:
You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.