Yes there is. We remove all of our overseas bases and forces. We slash the military budget. We offer to make sweet gentle but fiery love to every world leader. And after all that is done.....we sign free trade agreements with everybody. It's just that simple.
Of course I agree with you, but my question is more one of why it is that I find myself agreeing more and more with liberals, on this and other matters. I suspect the answer lies with two culprits who did more to pervert the conservative cause in the twentieth century than any others: Goldie and Reagan, both of whom neglected their economic credentials to campaign on an asinine pledge to increase the deficit to pay for more and more trinkets to appease Cold Warriors. I would probably be a rock-ribbed Republican had those two cretins never existed.
Word. Libertarians who cite either Reagan or Goldie as FFs are morons. I remember watching Reagan's infamous "A time for choosing speech" in support of Goldwater, it went like this: "We must reverse the expansion of government power, we must lower the tax burden on the average American, we must not plunge into a hundred years of darkness........and we must also guarantee victory in Vietnam." Pretty ironic how he suggests that we can prevent a hundred years of darkness by electing a man who openly promoted the use of atomic weapons in Vietnam. The greatest foreign policy is not one by arms, but one by trade. Trade is the ultimate deterent to war. Trade replaces the use of violence with that of competition which in turn leads to economic development. It is much less costly than war: the manufacture of hundreds of billions of dollars worth of technology made solely for the purpose of destruction and death, the recruitment of millions of men and women to fight and die for the state instead of selling their craft in the market for the betterment of society.
As for finding yourself in agreement with liberals on anti-interventionism and other issues, it might be that "liberals", at least in America, are trending towards libertarianism. Consider how many liberals agree with NAFTA and other free trade agreements. Consider how many liberals are in favor of a non-interventionist foreign policy. Consider how many liberals are in favor of marijuana decriminalization. Consider how many liberals are pushing for marriage equality. Consider how many liberals support a woman's right to choose. Hell, consider how many liberals are beginning to speak up about the individual's right to self-defense. When liberals desegregated society, by that action they acknowledged that a person isn't determined by their collective identity, but by who they were as an individual, a very libertarian belief.
But if one thinks hard about the origins of the terms "liberal" and "conservative", the meaning becomes more clear. The "conservative" wishes to uphold the status quo, the "liberal" wishes to change the status quo. Consider the history of mankind: thousands of years of rule under authoritarianism. The authoritarian ruled society and by his oppresive hand raised armies to enforce his policies on the indentured masses. After dynasty and dynasty of rule under the hand of the authoritarian, the absolute ruler of society, authoritarianism: absolute rule by an established elite, became the status quo. Under the status quo, kings and emperors killed without restraint, men and their families could be bought like cattle, the most petty of crimes could lead to execution, women were lower than dogs, and millions died in the name of mindless ideology. This is what conservatives upheld back then, this is where they're trending towards now.
If the status quo is authoritarianism, then what is the opposite of it? Libertarianism: the maximization of personal liberty. That a man no longer has a price tag, that a woman is equal in rights to a man, that the each individual is given a fair trial, that the state has no right to kill it's own people, that capital is a cheaper more efficient weapon against competitors than lethal force, that the individual has the right to speech without restraint, that the individual has the right to defend the greatest right of all: life.
It is inevitable when one follows an ideology whose goal is to overthrow the status quo, authoritarianism, that inevitably said ideology will become a libertarian ideology. Our forefathers were liberals fighting to rid themselves of monarchratic rule and establish a libertarian government. Maybe what we are witnessing is the repeat of this cycle.