>Because the first one: probably, yes. The second? No thank you.
Typical NATO free rider. Do you have the word ALLY in your culture?
Are you saying that the USA invaded Iraq to defend itself? Otherwise its NATO allies had no obligation at all to go out and help with the invasion.
Actually the USA government should have listened to NATO allies such as France who warned that the invasion was a mistake.
That would be funny, you know, if that were not that sad : ) Don't want to blame, but just a reminder - do you know on what terms Ukraine gave up its nuclear weapons?
We might, but that's on our own volition, not out of any obligation.
America wedged war for financial gain not for helping anybody. Why its ally would need to help when there is a no real need for the war in the first place.
When there's a conflict, I generally look at the "weight" of the opponents. Can you, with a straight face, call Iraq a real opponent or even threat for the US? More than that, do you think the US really needed allies to invade Iraq? (except for trying to use them to legitimize the war).
And your whole notion about "hot events" is ridiculous. It wasn't like Iraq in 2003 was USSR v2 and only the US intervention stopped it from taking over half of the world...