I haven't seen flight plans for the recent attacks on Iran, but the mission was launched from the US, requiring the 6 bombers to fly round trips of 37 hours. They also required 120 planes in support, around 50 of them being refuelling tankers, with a few fighters and a god number of reconnaissance and "support" planes - radar etc. 4000 personnel were involved in the mission.
This suggests that either NATO refused permission to fly the mission from bases in Europe, or that NATO wasn't asked, in anticipation of refusals. Even other administrations there have been occasions where NATO countries have closed airspace for US planes attacking in the Middle East, requiring planes to fly around them rather than over them.
This is a problem Trump and others do not seem to have considered, but US capability to threaten the Middle East, Africa, the 'Stans and more is considerably weakened when they no longer have a NATO presence in Europe. They currently have about 40 bases there, including ports along the Mediterranean. As well as problems of fuel and supplies, a non NATO USA would lose access to those ports and bases, but lose access to airspace and much of the area in the Mediterranean. Which also makes the US considerably less powerful for the Suez Canal.
Logistics aside, Trump has now attacked Syria, Iran and Muslims in Nigeria. He has spoken offensively of both Islam, it's countries and of Africa as well as telling Afghanistan that he wants Bagram airport back. He is pissing off a lot of people at a time when he can expect very little help. Countries formerly regarded as allies are unlikely to "burn" assets by sharing intel with the US, if it means those assets will no longer be in place to provide intel on possible actions against their countries. - The US has made it very plain that people inside these countries cannot assist the US. Afghans who provided help to the US and even fought alongside them are being deported, from the USA despite promises that were made, so the US will not be getting any intelligence from within.
Trump and Miller are inviting another 9/11, but this time the world will not be running around saying "we are all Americans". Most people will think the US deserved it. NATO is not it's members wingman. If one of it's members goes and picks fight without reason, NATO's responsibility is towards the country being attacked. There isn't a leader of a NATO country whose electorate would tolerate support for the hegemony of the USA. - and there are a lot of countries south of Europe who after the withdrawal of USAID and other programs feel no kinship or debt to the USA.
The US makes up a little over 2% of the world's population - under Stephen Miller and RFK Jr, that figure will be reduced. When a country is so incredibly unpopular, it is incredibly stupid to go picking fights.
= new reply since forum marked as read