However, this does not mean that we should consider the invasion of Afghanistan as "defense" either. No state had been attacked by the state of Afghanistan. That a few afghan civilians conducted a terrorist attack in the USA doesn't mean that Afghanistan attacked the USA. Afghanistan even agreed to consider handing over Osama bin Laden to the USA, as long as they were provided with evidence of his guilt - like any state that is asked to extradite a resident. The USA decided that it didn't care to wait and produce such evidence, so they launched an invasion less than a month after the attack.
It is true that this war in particular got acquiessence from the UN security council, so I will admit that it was not technically illegal (unlike the Iraq war).
My only point was that claiming NATO is a "purely defensive alliance" is not supported by history. This means that some NATO claims about Russia's lack of reasons for fearing NATO expansion are bullshit.
But to be very clear again, this doesn't justify Russia's illegal murderous invasion of Ukraine.
This is wrong. The country of Afghanistan did not conduct the WTC attacks. The nominally ruling clique in Afghanistan would not extradite OBL. If anything Afghanistan was an area of civil war in which the US intervened.
After the Taliban refused to turn over the mastermind of the attacks, Osama Bin Laden, Operation Enduring Freedom officially began 7 October 2001 with American and British bombing strikes against al Qaeda and Taliban forces in Afghanistan.
https://www.history.navy.mil/browse-by-topic/wars-conflicts-...