[PlainOleAmerican]

When you use your “imperial” powers to put down an unelected tyrant and free a people living in bondage, it’s called “liberating” a nation, not “invading” or “imperial conquering”.

This is the mammoth difference isolationist libertarians refuse to acknowledge.

[billbears]

to put down an unelected tyrant and free a people living in bondage, it’s called “liberating” a nation, not “invading” or “imperial conquering”

And you'll provide the limited government, conservative basis for this action then will you? Or is it now your position that we should 'put down' any leader that doesn't provide the 'right' form of government?

Of course you'll have to make the distinction between 'tyrants' that are currently on the US payroll (i.e. Musharaff), 'tyrants' that are no longer on the US payroll (making them susceptible to removal), or 'tyrants' that are currently keeping their peoples in bondage but their nation's geographical location represents no definitive interest from the current administration