> the view of the US public on NATO can be seen in any US TV series or Hollywood film - it does not exist.

I wouldn't say it doesn't exist. To me, it's always more of that "we'll let you guys muck about until it's totally obvious you're not going to fix it, then we'll ride in to save the day" attitude. Not saying that's accurate, but that's how it's portrayed by Hollywood

What Hollywood film that involves the US military does include NATO militaries? Rewatching SG-1, and of course it's US only.

Other than WWII films, I can't think of any Hollywood that actively promotes NATO in anything other than a joke. Even the more common cop shows, once an investigation goes international and INTERPOL has to be brought it, it's always a big sigh as if "oh boy, here's where the wheels fall off the bus" as the member agencies that make up INTERPOL are definitely looked down upon.

The flip side of this is watching European shows, and they all feel like US law enforcement is just a bunch of gung ho gun toting cowboys. Neither view is entirely accurate, nor are they inaccurate as they are just stereotypes

I don't think it was Hollywood per se but The Day After did.

I've heard that a us tv show about marines or whatever used to include European, Mexican and south American special forces as allies regularly, to add realism in conflict they're not alone in.

> Not saying that's accurate

It's fairly accurate

Less accurate for a NATO that contains Sweden & Finland, though. There's no doubt those 2 have and will pull their weight.

Speaking as a Canadian, whose country doesn't.

There's a difference between member states pulling their weight and the org itself pulling itself together to behave as a coherent entity. If Turkey (or any member) decides to veto or drags its feet prevent any action at all from occurring, it doesn't matter. In the mean time, the aggressor is taking advantage and ransacking its way through Europe. The whole time, the individual members are waiting for the Yanks to get off their arses to unilaterally come to action. Then they can later point at how the Yanks are always doing things unilaterally and turn them into the whipping boy.

There is no veto power on article 5. It is up to the member states to organize their response or not, but they cant prevent other states to do so.

> will pull their weight

How much do they weigh in comparison to the 800lb gorilla that is the United States?

The non-US members of NATO combined are larger economically, demographically and geographically than the US is. If they all pulled their weight NATO would have (slightly) more contribution from non-US countries than from the US.

The non-US members all have different views that must reach a consensus before any action which is precisely where the machine grinds to a halt. Which means a consensus is rarely reached. Contrasting that to the US which can bring all of its might with the whims of one leader and possible brow beating of congress to agree.

In this way, NATO/UN is interchangeable from the US point of view.

> If they all pulled their weight

This hypothetical doesn't advance the original claim. Sweden might punch well above its weight. But that hardly matters in absolute terms.

>unironically derives his understanding of the world from his consumption of Hollywood slop

Granted, a widespread problem, but, in my experience, nowhere as bad as in contemporary Germany. Why is that?