It's utterly dishonest to argue that NATO is a defensive alliance in the face of the fact that NATO has been regularly invading countries for many decades. Yugoslavia, Libya, Afghanistan, and Syria are just a few examples.
I couldn't find reference to NATO involvement in Syria.
Perhaps you mistake countries who are part of NATO to being NATO itself?
"just a few examples".. I expect there are lots more examples you can give? Especially if your point is that NATO is not a defensive alliance and is used to invade and gain territory.
Even if you discount Syria, the rest of the examples are NATO projects. If NATO was a defensive alliance as you claimed then it would not be constantly invading countries. NATO literally murdered and displaced millions of people in wars of aggression. It's absolutely surreal that somebody could possibly respond with I want to see more atrocities before I agree this is an aggressive alliance.
Meanwhile, US is obviously the biggest NATO member and what it does is clearly condoned by the rest of NATO members whether they are involved directly or not.
Perhaps you mistake countries who are part of NATO to being NATO itself?
"just a few examples".. I expect there are lots more examples you can give? Especially if your point is that NATO is not a defensive alliance and is used to invade and gain territory.