Maybe. But the wording you mention[0] is generally thought to avoid having relatively minor and perhaps disputed border conflicts, such as what we're seeing now

Maybe. But the wording you mention[0] is generally thought to avoid having relatively minor and perhaps disputed border conflicts, such as what we're seeing now between Turkey and Syria, from dragging the entire alliance into the fight. The other members saying, in essence, that the border conflict does not threaten the security of the North Atlantic area. But it definitely wasn't intended as a loophole to allow the U.S. and Canada to weasel out from participating in a major land war with the Soviet Union. This would have been hard to do in any case, what with having two Army corps permanently deployed in Europe during the Cold War... [0]In italics: The Parties agree that an armed attack against one or more of them in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack against them all and consequently they agree that, if such an armed attack occurs, each of them, in exercise of the right of individual or collective self-defence recognised by Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations, will assist the Party or Parties so attacked by taking forthwith, individually and in concert with the other Parties, such action as it deems necessary, including the use of armed force, to restore and maintain the security of the North Atlantic area.