The news out of the United Kingdom is...pathetic

by Andrea Widburg 

Great Britain, the nation that was once a colossus astride the world, has been reduced to a pathetic, emasculated wreck. PM Keir Starmer’s response to the war in Iran was the response of a man absolutely terrified of the Muslims that the British government, both Labour and Conservative, has imported into the country.

Before the joint US-Israel strike on Iran even occurred, Starmer made it plain that he would not allow any British bases to be used as staging points for the attack. His view was “Gentlemen, include me out.”

After the attacks began (and proved brilliantly effective, marking a new age in warfare), Starmer boasted about sidelining the UK. The only thing that Britain would do, he said, was help protect allied bases in the Middle East.

However, as the war continued, Starmer realized he’d made a mistake. Americans support Trump, the Iranian people (abroad and in Iran) support Trump, and the Gulf states support Trump. Within two days of the first strike, Starmer said that Americans could use those British bases but only if they didn’t hurt anyone with them. Their use was for “limited specific defensive purposes.”

Starmer clung to this position until the little ice floe on which he was standing shrank to nothing. So, over the last two days, Starmer began making tentative moves toward providing aid. He went so far as to announce that the government was considering sending two aircraft carriers to the Middle East.

Trump, disgusted by Starmer’s early cowardice and his attempt to jump to the front of the parade now, slapped him down...hard:

The big question is how to account for Starmer’s extraordinary cowardice. How did Great Britain go from the nation that was the most powerful military in the world in 1760 (only to lose America a few decades later, which was stupid of it), to the nation that defeated the seemingly unstoppable Napoleon, to the Victorian empire under which a quarter of the world was under British control, to the nation that, for two years, stood alone against Hitler? What the heck happened?

The answer, of course, is socialism. Although Britain was on the winning side in WWI (thanks to America’s intervention), it killed an estimated 880,000 men. A generation that should have been productive was dead, wounded, or disillusioned.

Additionally, Britain had a rigid class system that kept a stratum of the British population mired in poverty. As Alan J. Lerner wrote in My Fair Lady, “An Englishman’s way of speaking absolutely classifies him. The moment he talks, he makes some other Englishman despise him.”

Unlike America, people could not rise through hard work and innovation. Stuck, they were drawn to socialism. Despite the brilliance of Winston Churchill’s wartime leadership and the economic strides when Margaret Thatcher, in the 1970s, finally ended Britain’s stifling WWII economic policies, the British were hooked on government.

But the real kicker was when Britain, first out of an excess of guilt and then thanks to the socialists’ hatred for white Europeans, began inviting in the Muslim masses. An ancient, really quite civilized culture that had been trained in self-loathing, including loathing of its Christian heritage, was totally unprepared for a group of people who were labeled as “refugees” and “immigrants” but who came as conquerors. And so, politely, they yielded...and yielded...and yielded.

It doesn’t help that Starmer’s view of Islamic power in Great Britain is probably skewed. The total number of Muslims in Great Britain is estimated at only 6% of the population, which is still a manageable figure.

However, Starmer has lived in London for the past 20-plus years. There, the overall Muslim population is around 15%, with some areas having a Muslim population as high as 40% (Tower Hamlets) and 35% (Newham).

At these numbers, as this famous essay warns, at around 15% of the population, Muslims are ready for “hair-trigger rioting, jihad militia formations, sporadic killings, and the burnings of Christian churches and Jewish synagogues.” At 40%, you’re looking at “widespread massacres, chronic terror attacks, and ongoing militia warfare.” Starmer has long lived under the Muslim gun (or knife or acid attack). No wonder he’s scared.

Starmer is also scared because the British military is a pathetic wreck. The mighty British navy, once the engine of its world conquest, is minuscule:

The last time it was this small was in...wait for it...1642:

In the mid-1990s, Royal Navy officers at staff college in Shrivenham were asked to map out their predictions for what the service would look like in 30 years. One submariner said the navy would have 30 of the American Arleigh Burke-class guided-missile destroyers, the same number of frigates and 20 attack submarines.

More than a decade earlier, the navy had deployed 127 ships for the Falklands conflict, including 43 warships. The British nuclear submarine HMS Conqueror had sunk the Argentine cruiser ARA General Belgrano, killing 323 sailors onboard.

The submariner, who recently retired, cannot believe the size of the navy now. “Nobody wrote down that you would have six Type 45s [destroyers] that never work, two aircraft carriers we can’t man because we don’t have enough people, and seven frigates, many alongside. Nobody wanted this navy.”

It’s not just the size, though. It’s also the quality. If you look at the picture heading the linked essay, those sailors really don’t look like the same type of sailors who won the Battle of Trafalgar. Moreover, those sailors can’t even get to sea. The HMS Dragon, one of the ships the UK was going to send to relieve Cyprus, is stuck in port thanks to the government’s cost-cutting contract with a necessary trade union, limiting workers to 9-5 office hours.

Meanwhile, the big debate in the British military is how much makeup men can wear:

Army chiefs have been criticised for launching a review – just as the Iran war intensifies – into whether male soldiers can wear make-up.

While British personnel in Cyprus called for more protection and HMS Dragon was stuck in port, all serving soldiers were asked on Thursday whether they thought men could apply cosmetics and wear their hair like women.

They were surveyed on woke ‘gender-free’ changes which could see men wearing make-up with long hair or hair extensions, painted nails and earrings.

The consultation from Army HQ in Andover asked soldiers if they agreed ‘rules on make-up should be gender-free’, explaining ‘this means that men, women and non-binary service personnel can all wear make-up in the same way’.

In other words, Starmer isn’t just afraid of Muslims; he’s got a military that can’t do anything.

Starmer and his Labour government are doing more damage to once-Great Britain than Hitler ever did or even dreamed of.

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2026/03/the_news_out_of_the_united_kingdom_is_pathetic.html