"Paper Tiger" Is Good for Americans — If Congress Actually Shows Up

Trump called NATO a "paper tiger" after the Hormuz blockade worked without them. It's being covered as a burn. It's actually a structural moment.

Why it's good. Washington's farewell warning wasn't anti-alliance — it was anti-entanglement. The Hormuz chain ran through commitments most Americans never debated: Israel wanted to strike Iran, Iran closed the Strait, the US blockaded. The people who pay for these wars — in taxes, gas prices, enlistment — have the least voice in starting them. Pulling back from NATO is good for ordinary Americans.

Why it's dangerous. The president just shed NATO's friction without replacing it with a domestic check. War-making now runs with no alliance consultation, no congressional authorization, no public debate on underlying commitments. That's not "America First." It's one person first — and the next president inherits the same unchecked tool.

The move is Congress. Not in theory. Specifically:

• War Powers Resolution vote on Hormuz — not to stop the blockade, but to establish the principle.
• Commitment audit. What obligations could draw us into war, who authorized them, when?
• Sunset clauses. The 2001 AUMF is 25 years old and still being stretched.

Call your rep this week. Three questions:

1. Will you invoke War Powers on the Hormuz operation?
2. Will you support a public audit of open-ended military commitments?
3. Will you sunset the 2001 AUMF?

The tool worked. Make the next use of it come through you.

Source: Trump on Truth Social