IS THIS PATHETIC, OR WHAT? – AT 8:31 A.M. ET:  In the United States Navy they refer to Britain's Royal Navy as "the senior service," a sign of respect for a navy that once ruled the waves.   Now, consider this, from London's Telegraph:

The British military intervention in Libya is unsustainable, the head of the Navy has said.

Adml Sir Mark Stanhope said the campaign would have been more effective without the Government's defence cuts.

The aircraft carrier and the Harrier jump-jets scrapped under last year's strategic defence review would have made the mission more effective, faster and cheaper, he said.

Sir Mark warned that the Navy would not be able to sustain its operations in Libya for another three months without making cuts elsewhere.

The First Sea Lord's comments will stir the debate over defence cuts that have left Britain without a working aircraft carrier and forced the Royal Navy's Harrier jump jets to be mothballed.

Highlighting military anger over the shrinking Armed Forces, another admiral warned that "comical" defence cuts would leave the Navy without enough ships to be effective.

How sad, how sad.  Britain is a symbol of what's happened all over Europe – defense cuts made to fuel the welfare state, without any understanding that a strong defense is what allows any nation to exist at all.  As we've said here, there's the great Britain, and the not-so-great Britain.  The latter is winning, even with nominal conservatives in power.

Britain has a great defense minister in Liam Fox, whom I've had the privilege of meeting.  His vision is a strong Britain, firmly allied with the United States.  But Britain has a left wing that won't budge, and will become a defense backwater before too long.

I'm sure they'll even send James Bond into retirement.

June 14, 2011