I now know exactly two things about Barbados, and the other things is that they unrecognized the British monarchy two years ago
this post was submitted on 21 Apr 2024
393 points (97.6% liked)
World News
32514 readers
513 users here now
News from around the world!
Rules:
-
Please only post links to actual news sources, no tabloid sites, etc
-
No NSFW content
-
No hate speech, bigotry, propaganda, etc
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
Everything I know about Barbados involves limbo competitions in the year 3,000...
Here's a third one: They have a Welcome Stamp visa program where you can work remotely from there for a year, and it's renewable. You can even bring your family. Under this program you only pay income tax on your country of origin.
I know three things about Barbados :3
Have a fourth one: Infamous pirate, Bartholomew Roberts, hated Barbadosians so much he even put this on his flag.
And here's a fifth: Rihanna is from Barbados.
Based
Neat. Put the embassy in Jerusalem.
Barbasedos 
So then what was this about?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Partition_Plan_for_Palestine
Did it not create a Jewish state and an Arab state i.e. Israel and Palestine?
Note the word "Plan". You've provided a proposal, which has not been implemented.
So why does Israel exist?
They have the support of more world powers than Palestine.
So how were they established?
~~So why~~ does israel exist?
Israel has been accepted as a UN member. Palestine has not.
That still doesn't answer the question. The second sentence in the Wikipedia article about the partition plan for Palestine is
On 29 November 1947, the UN General Assembly adopted the Plan as Resolution 181 (II).
so I'm not really sure how you got the idea that this was "just a proposal".
The article you linked says
The United States says an independent Palestinian state should be established through direct negotiations between Israel and the Palestinian Authority and not through UN action.
which makes it even more unclear. Was Israel created through UN action or did they just steal the land and expel the Palestinians? Did they negotiate directly with the Palestinians in 1948 and arrive on the agreement to share the land according to the borders that existed before 1967?
If you (or anyone) actually have an answer, I'd be happy to hear it.
Just because there's a UN Resolution passed, doesn't mean everything that's proposed magically happens. Governments of all levels accept long-term plans, but then they need to do further actions to follow through on those plans (or in many cases, they don't do anything and those plans just stay as dreams and what-ifs).
Israel is a state because they've declared it and the UN has accepted Israel as a member, it's really that simple. If you want to know why Israel's statehood was accepted, that's very, very complicated and involves millennia of history. I certainly can't condense it here, maybe others could, but I doubt it. I honestly think Wikipedia's a pretty good source for the history of Israel, and I'd suggest starting the British Mandate and looking back if you need more context.
Israel was not established through direct negotiations between Israel and Palestine. Why the double standard?
I don't understand your question. Can you please explain it?
Maybe the answer is colonialism?
Israel gets to be recognized as a state despite not negotiating with Palestine.
Palestine isn't allowed to be a state without negotiating with Israel.
It's a double standard.
It's immensely unfair, but I'm not sure I'd call that a "double standard."
I'm no expert, Israel was accepted as a UN when they pledged to implement the partition plan. They've never followed through, so you could argue they lied to get in, but once they're in, it's difficult to expel/suspend a member.
It looks like it wasn't until decades later that Palestine sought UN membership. So it kind of makes sense to say the applicant needs to appease the existing members. You could also argue the partition plan was/is unfair, and many wars have been fought over it. I'm just not sure the situations are similar enough to be a "double standard."
This isn't about appeasing existing members, it's just the US blocking everything. Also, asking the colonized to negotiate with their own colonizers is absurd - just wolves and deer negotiating on what's for dinner.
...still not a "double standard"
The double standard is "Israel gets to be a state without negotiating with the people it's stealing the land from, Palestine doesn't get to be a state without negotiating with the people who stole their land." It's a double standard enforced by the US, but it's definitely a double standard and the rest of the world can see it.
All the US is doing is destroying its own credibility and the legitimacy of the UN. This shit is going the way of the League of Nations.
Alright, thanks. I took your advice and I think I found my answer in the 1948 Palestine war:
During the war, the British withdrew from Palestine, Zionist forces conquered territory and established the State of Israel, and over 700,000 Palestinians fled or were expelled. It was the first war of the Israeli–Palestinian conflict and the broader Arab–Israeli conflict.
Did they negotiate directly with the Palestinians in 1948 and arrive on the agreement to share the land according to the borders that existed before 1967? [ Does solving the issue by war count?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acre,_Israel
Before the 1948 Arab-Israeli War broke out, the Carmeli Brigade's 21 Battalion commander had repeatedly damaged the Al-Kabri aqueduct that furnished Acre with water, and when Arab repairs managed to restore water supply, then resorted to pouring flasks of typhoid and dysentery bacteria into the aqueduct, as part of a biological warfare programme. At some time in late April or early May 1948, - Jewish forces had cut the town's electricity supply responsible for pumping water - a typhoid epidemic broke out. Israeli officials later credited the facility with which they conquered the town in part to the effects of the demoralization induced by the epidemic.[50]
Israel's Carmeli forces attacked on May 16 and, after an ultimatum was delivered that, unless the inhabitants surrendered, 'we will destroy you to the last man and utterly,'[51] the town notables signed an instrument of surrender on the night between 17–18 May 1948.
No, war doesn't count. Someone please tell Putin while we're at it.