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

The Labour Party Q&A Thread - Ask/Join here!

This thread is sponsored by:
Announcements Posted on
Become part of the Welcome Squad! Apply here! 28-10-2014
    • 13 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by sohanshah)
    Speaking on behalf of no-one here:

    In Iraq we were certain that weapons were there and we were heavily pressured by the US to go and remove the dictatorial government in power. In doing so we have made many mistakes yet the situation there for most has improved greatly.
    It is a shame none of the more avid TSR Labour could assist you here.

    But could you indulge me in a little tearing-the-meat-of-the-bones, so to speak, but you didn't answer my questions, intentionally or accidently, I ask them again with a few more in response to your comment:

    1. Does the Labour Party accept that the invasion of Iraq has resulted in an increased threat of terrorism? And what does the Labour Party intend on doing as a result of that?
    2. What is the single biggest regret of the Labour Party, in terms of the home affairs?
    3. To what extent does the Labour Party consider the importance of such a 'relationship' with the US, considering the effects it has had?
    4. Your vague response may need clarification for me (see italics), but in what sense has there been an improvement in the situation in Iraq? Is there not an internal 'war' between Shea and Sunni?
    5. What real and substantial threat did Iraq pose to the UK, that justified our invasion of Iraq?


    Regards
    Lord Hysteria
    • 11 followers
    Offline

    (Original post by smalltownboy)
    Are you more New Labour than Old Labour?
    Are you now inherently a Thatcherite, right-wing party?
    We are the TSR Labour Party.
    We are more left-wing that the real Labour Party, so no, we are not Thatcherite in the slightest.

    (Original post by Lord Hysteria)
    Questions.
    I'm sorry, I went to eat dinner. I'm now going to type up some answers for you.
    • 10 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Audrey Hepburn)
    So in the meantime we just sit around twiddling our thumbs allow genocide to happen!? For God's sake! We're not simply talking about a corrupt government or inflation or poverty, we're talking about masses of people being needlessly slaughtered!!

    We have a moral responsibility to interfere! It is ridiculous that we do nothing simply because the UN is busy with other things and because other countries may ask for help! Just because we interfere with one country does not mean that we are obliged to do the same with others.
    Firstly responding to someone else above this post: Yes, applying Pressure is all good and well, have you ever tried pressurising someone who has Mugabe next to him??? Pressure has been apllied for the last 10 years to these African countries and as yet, no avail has come from it. The bettermore sensible option is to let the UN apply embargo's and other warnings against the country however Mugabe's regime is not going to end ths way. I believe, as Labour have done for many years, the whole world must come togetherand crush down the dirst that is Mugabe together: Politically, not with Force.

    As to this post quoted above, well yeah we do have a moral responsibility but going in all guns blazing will solve nothing. More people will die and there is enough poverty/famine in the area as it is. In my opinion, people have to keep patient over these inhumane crusades occurring in Africa. The situation will be resolved, not by fighting the militia of 5 countries at once, but by changin the atmsphere and political sense in those countries. The people there need to be taught and aided to sense: not tortured or killed to sense.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by The Humble Mosquito)
    Yes, let me echo this. I'd be very interested to hear how TSR Labour justifies Iraq whilst not getting involved into Darfur where genocide is occuring.
    TSR Labour didn't invade Iraq. Nor do we have the power to send the Black Watch to Khartoum or Harare.
    • 24 followers
    Online

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by alasdair_R)
    Kinda - my point was more along the lines of 'Should it be a long-term aim of the party to secure the means of production in the hands of the collective ownership of the workers?'
    Personally I would say no, I would hope that in the long run the workers should have a much bigger stake in the way that things are run and that their wages should be higher, and that owners/managers should be much more accountable to their employees etc. But I do not believe that collective ownership is personally my long term ideal.

    However I can only speak for myself and not for the whole party as other people may have differing opinions.
    • 13 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Dionysus)
    TSR Labour didn't invade Iraq.
    The Humble Mosquito didn't say TSR Labour invaded Iraq??

    See below
    There is not a mere hint of the word 'invasion'

    (Original post by The Humble Mosquito)
    I'd be very interested to hear how TSR Labour justifies Iraq whilst not getting involved into Darfur where genocide is occuring.
    • 24 followers
    Online

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lord Hysteria)
    The Humble Mosquito didn't say TSR Labour invaded Iraq??

    See below
    There is not a mere hint of the word 'invasion'
    I think that what dionysus was trying to say was that the tsr labour party didn't choose to go to war with Iraq and in fact many do not agree with it so how can we justify something that many of us didn't agree with in the first place.
    • 11 followers
    Offline

    (Original post by Lord Hysteria)
    Does the Labour Party accept that the invasion of Iraq has resulted in an increased threat of terrorism? And what does the Labour Party intend on doing as a result of that?
    Yes, I accept this. Personally, I am undecided on what the next step should be. In a way, part of me feels that there should be a withdrawal of troops from the country. This would, however, leave the country incredibly unstable. (This is if it is a full withdrawal, including the Americans.) If it were possible to pull the British troops out, I would support the decision. When the war started, I believed that Saddam Hussain needed to be removed. The war after this has changed dramatically, and I no longer support it.

    What is the single biggest regret of the Labour Party, in terms of the home affairs?
    I don't know that there is a single largest regret. Many mistakes show themselves. However, if this question were to be asked of the TSR Labour Party, as is the first intention of this thread, I would have to say that we have no regrets.

    To what extent does the Labour Party consider the importance of such a 'relationship' with the US, considering the effects it has had?
    Pretty useful on the whole. A lot better than having them as enemies. Without the US as our allies the country would be a lot worse off.

    What real and substantial threat did Iraq pose to the UK, that justified our invasion of Iraq?
    The answer you want is 'none, we shouldn't have invaded.' However, I'd like to point out that the war was not launched for selfish reasons. We wanted to rid them of the weapons of mass destruction we thought they had, as Saddam Hussain had invaded other countries in the past. We also needed to free the Iraqi people of Saddam.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    My question. Ok I don't mean to sound rude , but, what is the point of the tsr house of commons?
    (not strictly for the labour party but i'm sure you can answer)
    • 24 followers
    Online

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by .Ed.)
    My question. Ok I don't mean to sound rude , but, what is the point of the tsr house of commons?
    (not strictly for the labour party but i'm sure you can answer)
    The tsr house of commons is just another part of debate and discussion. It is a mock parliament which is voted in by the users of TSR. It doesn't have any real power it is just something that we all do for enjoyment
    • 13 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by randdom)
    I think that what dionysus was trying to say was that the tsr labour party didn't choose to go to war with Iraq and in fact many do not agree with it so how can we justify something that many of us didn't agree with in the first place.
    There appears to be some confusion, I merely took the instance of correcting Dionysus as it appeared (objectively) as though he was dismissing a comment The Humble Mosquito made on grounds of something she didn't say.

    Nonetheless, as some-what of a representative of the Labour Party, correct me if I am mistaken with such an assumption, you take the burden of clarifying and explaining the party's positions, regardless of your beliefs?

    Am I to presume that TSR Labour have a different agenda or political manifesto?
    I am some-what new to this.
    • 11 followers
    Offline

    (Original post by .Ed.)
    My question. Ok I don't mean to sound rude , but, what is the point of the tsr house of commons?
    (not strictly for the labour party but i'm sure you can answer)
    It allows those of us who enjoy politics and debate to have a bit of fun.
    • 2 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by .Ed.)
    My question. Ok I don't mean to sound rude , but, what is the point of the tsr house of commons?
    (not strictly for the labour party but i'm sure you can answer)
    You don't sound rude. There is no 'point', but I think I speak for others in saying that we find it interesting and stimulating to debate with people of both similar and opposing beliefs. We are all interested in Politics, and the HofC is a great platform to exercise that interest. The TSR HofC holds no executive or actual power, just in case you were wondering..
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lord Hysteria)
    The Humble Mosquito didn't say TSR Labour invaded Iraq??

    See below
    There is not a mere hint of the word 'invasion'
    The question related to how we 'justify' it. We can't be expected to justify something we aren't responsible for, nor have expressed any support for.
    • 13 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by randdom)
    The tsr house of commons is just another part of debate and discussion. It is a mock parliament which is voted in by the users of TSR. It doesn't have any real power it is just something that we all do for enjoyment
    On a different but parallel note, how does one go-about starting up a House of Lords?
    That would be fantastic.
    • 11 followers
    Offline

    (Original post by Lord Hysteria)
    Am I to presume that TSR Labour have a different agenda or political manifesto?
    I am some-what new to this.
    I have mentioned several times that we are a lot more left-wing than the real Labour Party. So yes, we do.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jangrafess)
    I have mentioned several times that we are a lot more left-wing than the real Labour Party. So yes, we do.
    What exactly makes you more left-wing? What would you prefer instead of current Labour policy? Higher personal taxation? Public owenership of some industries?
    • 13 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Dionysus)
    The question related to how we 'justify' it. We can't be expected to justify something we aren't responsible for, nor have expressed any support for.
    see my responce in
    http://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/show...0&postcount=49
    • 1 follower
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by sohanshah)
    As to this post quoted above, well yeah we do have a moral responsibility but going in all guns blazing will solve nothing. More people will die and there is enough poverty/famine in the area as it is. In my opinion, people have to keep patient over these inhumane crusades occurring in Africa. The situation will be resolved, not by fighting the militia of 5 countries at once, but by changin the atmsphere and political sense in those countries. The people there need to be taught and aided to sense: not tortured or killed to sense.
    I agree that the 'all guns blazing' approach is not the best solution, but a protective military response is bound to have a positive impact - it certainly did in Rwanda. Essentially, the approach of 'changing the atmosphere' will solve the causes of the crisis, but will not have any effect in enough time to save anyone now. Quite simply, it will be too late and when it comes to playing with human lives, too late is not an option.
    • 13 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jangrafess)
    I have mentioned several times that we are a lot more left-wing than the real Labour Party. So yes, we do.
    This sounds interesting, is there a link to your manifesto?

Reply

Submit reply

Register

Thanks for posting! You just need to create an account in order to submit the post
  1. this can't be left blank
    that username has been taken, please choose another Forgotten your password?
  2. this can't be left blank
    this email is already registered. Forgotten your password?
  3. this can't be left blank

    6 characters or longer with both numbers and letters is safer

  4. this can't be left empty
    your full birthday is required
  1. By joining you agree to our Ts and Cs, privacy policy and site rules

  2. Slide to join now Processing…

Updated: October 21, 2014
New on TSR

Halloween 2014

Join the TSR Halloween party...if you dare!

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