"Do you see anything wrong with expecting the queen to take care of her subjects? Why is not more said about this? I believe it is because people can be so hateful, they'd rather hate on Trump rather than be objective and ask questions about the people who should be looking after the Bahamas.
#75 | POSTED BY GOATMAN AT 2019-09-13 10:34 AM | REPLY | FLAG:"
The Bahamas became an independent, sovereign country in 1973.
They voluntarily chose to join the Commonwealth at that time and this entails accepting the Queen as head of state, but the relationship is not the same as the relationship she has with citizens of the UK. The Bahamas is free at any time to leave the Commonwealth and to renounce the Queen as head of state.
So Bahamians are not subjects of the Queen in the way I suspect you mean it; they cannot move to the UK without complying with immigration regulations. Similarly, UK citizens cannot live in the Bahamas without complying with their immigration rules. In this regard therefore, Bahamians need to jump through immigration hoops in both the UK and US, but there is no denying that the US is much more conveniently located and this is important.
The islands will be uninhabitable to all but the most hearty for some time; rebuilding will be long and difficult ( I speak from experience ) and the ability to get on island quickly, make decisions, deal with practical matters and get out again will be very important. This cannot be done from the UK.
Does this in and of itself impose an obligation on the US - no. But is suggesting sending them to the UK a viable alternative - absolutely not. If the US wants to be a world leader, sometimes it has to step up and this would be one of them. Or is the just another way in which Trump has convinced supposedly patriotic Americans to accept yet another small diminishing of America's leadership role?