Britain's Military Drawdown

My knowledge of military matters as they pertain to geopolitics is sadly limited, but the news that Britain is considering a major drawdown in its military capability strikes me as something that should generate great concern for us, and not just strategically (emphasis mine):

In the most significant changes to Britain’s defences since the post-Suez review of 1957, ministers and officials plan to scrap large parts of the Armed Forces. ...

But the RAF will bear the brunt of the planned cuts. The Air Force will lose 7,000 airmen – almost one sixth of its total staff – and 295 aircraft. The cuts will leave the Force with fewer than 200 fighter planes for the first time since 1914. In addition, the Navy will lose two submarines, three amphibious ships and more than 100 senior officers, along with 2,000 sailors and marines.

The Army faces a 40 per cent cut to its fleet of 9,700 armoured vehicles and the loss of a 5,000-strong brigade of troops. ...

If implemented, the cuts will mean that Britain will almost certainly depart the world stage as a major military power and become what military chiefs call a “medium-scale player”.

Britain's Armed Forces have actually been in decline since WWII, relative to the role they play in global affairs. Prior to WWII, the British Empire had influence over a large portion of the world's population in every corner of the globe. Economic, political, and changing social attitudes over the latter half of the 20th Century have had a major impact to their military, but in spite of their decline in reach, the British Armed Forces retained a high-level capability that made them our most reliable partner in NATO. The special relationship we have with Britain, both politically and militarily, is the bedrock of the NATO alliance. Should Britain follow through on this reduction, the future of NATO becomes even more uncertain. The global balance of power is already fluid; the departure of Britain as a major military power will create a vacuum that someone will inevitably fill.

The fact that the drawdown appears likely should concern us. But we should also take careful note as to why the drawdown is being proposed. Britain is broke:

Britain, which is considered as one of the world’s most wealthy and powerful countries, faces the challenge of insufficient funds to protect itself against all potential threats.

“We don’t have the money as a country to protect ourselves against every potential future threat, we just don’t have it. The country is in an economic crisis, defence cannot be exempted from it,” British Defence Secretary, Liam Fox said.

Britain has a vast domestic entitlement system and astronomical national debt. They are even looking at dismantling their socialized health service, because it has become unaffordable and unsustainable. The most basic economic rule is paramount: there is only so much money a country can spend in any given year. Without going into a discussion of how our nation handles discretionary and non-discretionary spending as a budgetary matter, suffice it to say that as a percentage of GDP, the more you spend on domestic entitlements and debt service, the less that is available to spend on other needs, including defense.

The United States has the strongest, most able military in the world - today. But it would be naïve to think that we are not susceptible to the same pressures that may result in the retreat of Britain from the world stage.