That is a few (notably America, Turkey, Britaina nd France) members acting on their own and not as NATO.
ECTY. That is the point! NATO is a political weapon. A way to scare off people from attacking your country. No offense but I would not count on Turkey to come to America's defense militarily anymore than you should count on America to come to Turkeys defense miritarily.
You're right about NATO being a political weapon but it has also requirements too being a part of it. On giving us Patriots for instance again, not only NATO used every excuse not to give them but also they didn't provide the enough amount of them when they finally were convinced that our border was not safe and we needed them. Plus everyone knows that Turkey is an outsider at NATO and Europe. We are certainly not perceived as Europeans by the Europeans and being a big muslim majority country is, well self explanatory. You can see the same treatment against Turkey on EU negotiations. All I'm trying to say is, on paper every NATO member is equal, but in reality some members are just more equal than others. Btw, it's kinda reciprocal also, I mean they know too that we won't be with them lets say on a hypothetical new crusade, obviously, but in practice, we give them more than what we take from them.
You are smart about not counting on Turkey as a totally committed ally. Because to be honest, Turkish people are one of the most anti-American(not American people but American politics, Turkish people have a well sense of distinction about it) public you can find in the world. Turkey being a good American ally is not from the will of its people but the choice of the right wing political leaders that ruled the country predominantly.
As an example to this would be the 1st March Resolution(I can't find the right translation), that was proposed in our parliament to basically allow joining Iraqi war alongside USA and authorizing alliance forces to use Turkish bases and air space in 2003. Although the government were again a right wing pro-America and had a tremendous majority and influence on the parliament, the proposal failed due to a huge pressure of the public. Plus Turkey even had received direct orders from the US government for the resolution to pass but people didn't let it. It was very interesting because even US were very sure about a positive result so they were ready to implement the pre-scheduled plans and about to sending the troops and military equipments.
Now, today, the only reason that Turkey could not make an intervention about the Syrian issue is that the very right wing government of today exactly knows that public is decisively against a Syrian war. Nato implied many times that it's right of Turkey to take necessary steps to defend herself and make an intervention on the situation of Syria, actually they even kinda tried to encourage(there were many border infringements by Syria), but our government was aware that it would be their absolute end of ruling. Because even the most pro-government people are against a Syrian war.
Now they will try to do it with Nato countries and will do their best to be in line with USA's politics.
So, Turkey is an odd figure in world politics that have pro-imperialist governments but has an anti-war populace(especially with the neighbors and the muslim countries. Because we were living together with them until just less than a century and the bounds of hundreds of years are not disappearing easily. Just till beginning of the Syrian crisis(2011 or so), our people and Syrian people were able to meet and cross the border freely on certain days(without any bureaucratic procedures), because there still are big families that have two halves on the each side and vice versa. And now because of someones(NATO, US, Brits, France etc) wanting a war for their greater plans, they expect us to fight against our neighbors. It will only be alongside NATO with a minimal participation of Turkey, and even that will be judged and condemned by the Turkish public forever.