THE coalition’s parliamentary defeat on possible military action against the Syrian regime can be seen as a defining moment in modern British history. Britain has departed the world-stage and gone home. It is no longer interested in foreign military adventures despite pressure from key allies including the United States. Britain is no longer gung-ho and the British public has no stomach for further conflict. Now, it could be argued that Prime Minister David Cameron put Britain on a path to war without consulting the British public first. He showed poor judgement for thinking that his own MPs would support him and his position has certainly been weakened. Internationally, his image has been tarnished and Washington now knows that Britain can no longer be relied upon to follow them into conflict. "We no longer have the Brits," must be the message which is going around Washington and perhaps the Obama administration should think why? Well the answer is simple;the Iraq war debacle, the long conflict in Afghanistan and the hundreds of service people who have been killed have changed public opinion. The British public no longer wants the United Kingdom to be the world’s policeman alongside the U.S. others should be taking the lead. Why should Britain get involved? It is not our problem. All these are valid points. But for the last two decades Britain has been a key player on the world stage despite its limited military capability. Both Tony Blair and David Cameron have strutted the world and punched above their weight and parliament and the British public were willing to give them the benefit of the doubt. But all this ended on Thursday night. No more war. No more troops on foreign soil. In some ways I am rather pleased. I was in two minds whether Britain should have got involved in the Syrian crisis. I could have been persuaded to back military action but I was concerned that Britain and the British people would have been put in danger. If Britain has no money for hospitals and schools then it shouldn’t use its limited military resources on a foreign adventure. Times have changed since the Iraq war when MPs could be counted on to back the government on any military operation. Prime Minister David Cameron must now forget the world stage and concentrate on the reason why he was elected;to get Britain out of recession. Can Cameron survive? Yes I think so because the majority of the British public support his economic policies. But he will be remembered as the Prime Minister who put the case for war and was defeated. He had deployed his tanks only to find that they were sent home without a shot being fired. He talked war without checking with his generals and foot soldiers. He has been shown to be a poor General because an army marches on its stomach and Britain had no stomach for this one and like any good general he should have known this.