NATO wasn't involved in the invasion of Iraq, though NATO did operations during the occupation supporting the Iraqi government.
NATO was involved in both the initial campaign against Afghanistan in response to an attack on a NATO member and later support operations in support of the new (and now defunct) Afghan government, but neither was inconsistent with its defensive character.
For future reference, the proper whataboutism here is Yugoslavia and Libya, nor Iraq and Afghanistan. If you are going to play the game, at least know what you are talking about.
That is semantics.
NATO does not have its own army, but the members form a common army from their national troops.
Iraqis and Afghans certainly did not notice the difference that they were not attacked by a joint NATO army of British, Italians, Americans etc. but only by an army of the willing made up of British, Italians and Americans.
If the US had been able to declare an alliance, it would have been under the NATO umbrella.
I doubt that during the Cold War a distinction would have been made between a Warsaw Pact army of Poles, Romanians and Russians and a coalition army of Poles, Romanians and Russians.
NATO was involved in both the initial campaign against Afghanistan in response to an attack on a NATO member and later support operations in support of the new (and now defunct) Afghan government, but neither was inconsistent with its defensive character.
For future reference, the proper whataboutism here is Yugoslavia and Libya, nor Iraq and Afghanistan. If you are going to play the game, at least know what you are talking about.