> NATO is a military coalition that sits outside the regular National framework of war making.
False.
> If a member is attacked, that is a declaration of war on ALL members
Also false.
> Consider a rogue state/leader member picking war with a nuclear power and escalating to the point of no return. What then?
Sucks to be the rogue state, but assuming you meant for the rogue state to be a NATO member, I don't see even a theoretical problem for NATO, but perhaps instead of posing a question you’d like to actually make an argument that makes sense given the actual text of Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty and the scope of the right of self-defense under Article 51 of the UN Charter.
> The objectives that NATO seem to want
Well, “seem to want” is rather amorphous and subjective, and so is your description, which doesn't even say what objectives you think NATO “seem to want”.
> For all the dick waving that Putin has done, the threat of war with severe consequences has been initiated by
...Russia, each time they've actually invaded another section of Ukraine. Which isn't just a threat of war with severe consequences, but an actual war, and crime of aggression, with severe consequences.
That’s not just “dick waving”, which is a better metaphorical description of the NATO response to date than the Russian action.
> unelected bureaucrats at NATO.
The top decision-makers at NATO are the heads of government of the members, who are, though indirectly in some cases, all elected.
False.
> If a member is attacked, that is a declaration of war on ALL members
Also false.
> Consider a rogue state/leader member picking war with a nuclear power and escalating to the point of no return. What then?
Sucks to be the rogue state, but assuming you meant for the rogue state to be a NATO member, I don't see even a theoretical problem for NATO, but perhaps instead of posing a question you’d like to actually make an argument that makes sense given the actual text of Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty and the scope of the right of self-defense under Article 51 of the UN Charter.
> The objectives that NATO seem to want
Well, “seem to want” is rather amorphous and subjective, and so is your description, which doesn't even say what objectives you think NATO “seem to want”.
> For all the dick waving that Putin has done, the threat of war with severe consequences has been initiated by
...Russia, each time they've actually invaded another section of Ukraine. Which isn't just a threat of war with severe consequences, but an actual war, and crime of aggression, with severe consequences.
That’s not just “dick waving”, which is a better metaphorical description of the NATO response to date than the Russian action.
> unelected bureaucrats at NATO.
The top decision-makers at NATO are the heads of government of the members, who are, though indirectly in some cases, all elected.