Nonsense. Some NATO members might complain about the war but it was alway known they were going to help train and support what ever was the post war situation was. Why should they get involved in a war of aggression by nato members when nato should just be about defence?
In what way is training and supporting a sovereign governments own forces after they have invited you and under the auspices of a unsc mandate an aggressive act?
NATO should be able the defence of nato members. Not clearing up the mess made by nato members who are involve in wars. The uk and us shouldn’t have been able to offload the cost, risk and logistics onto nato.
Indeed nato shouldn’t have been involved in the post war reconstruction at all even in a non combat way.. their support would be weight into the calculation of the cost of war by the aggressors
So you don't want your defensive alliance to be active anywhere in even non combat ways? What exactly would it do again? Just send the Russians love letters and beg them not to invade another European country?
Comments
Some of the largest NATO members forcefully and vociferously protested against the invasion of Iraq.