Most conservative and left-wing groups in the developed world are in agreement when it comes to membership in alliances such as NATO, ANZUS and others. However, it would seem that some groups outside of the mainstream policy-making circles (libertarians, fascists, communists, etc.) tend to be less supportive of alliances. For this topic, I would like to focus primarily on libertarians.

In the early days of American classical liberalism, military alliances were often viewed with skepticism. However, they were not entirely ruled out, as the Founding Fathers and post-revolutionary Americans formed temporary alliances with several countries, such as France during the American Revolution (and War of 1812), Sweden during the Barbary Wars, the Netherlands during the Sumatran Expedition, Britain & France during the Opium Wars, etc. However, these alliances seldom lasted following their respective conflicts.

Some early American classical liberals, such as Thomas Jefferson, took a more interventionist approach to foreign policy, believing that the United States should create an "empire of liberty." Jefferson's vision of democratic countries working together didn't bring about any long-standing alliances, however, as much of the world was still ruled by autocratic governments at the time. Several early policymakers continued Jefferson's ideas by attempting to build better relations with the fledgling Latin American countries, though no formal military alliances were ever formed.

The only major peace-time military alliance prior to the overthrow of the Kingdom of Hawaii in 1893, appears to be between the United States and Korea. Article I of the 1882 Treaty of Peace, Amity, Commerce and Navigation stated:

Source: http://photos.state.gov/libraries/korea/49271/June_2012/1-1822%20Treaty.pdf

Modern libertarians are somewhat divided on the issue of military alliances. During the Cold War, most libertarians supported America's commitment to the defense of the free world. Libertarian political leaders, such as Gary Johnson, never wavered in their commitment to America's allies and even supported the Vietnam War. Libertarian-leaning authors during the Cold War, such as Robert A. Heinlein, wrote about the importance of the United States leading a "world government" to prevent a nuclear war.

Other Cold War libertarians, such as Ron Paul, were very critical of America's alliance system. Senator Ron Paul has long opposed American intervention and military cooperation between the free world. With that being said, Ron Paul has argued that World War II and the early stages of the War in Afghanistan were justified. He has also voiced some sympathy towards Israel, though believes that the United States should remain neutral if Israel's neighbors attack them.

Following Ron Paul's retirement, there seems to be a growing movement away from non-interventionist policy in libertarian camps. Gary Johnson, the Libertarian Party's candidate in the 2012 presidential election, has stated that he supports military alliances and overseas American military bases in cases where it is legitimately beneficial to American security. Johnson has stated that he supports American alliances (and military bases in) Europe, Japan and South Korea; though he believes that our presence should be scaled back. Johnson supported the initial stages of the War in Afghanistan. Johnson has also voiced his support for Israel and has stated that he would use the American military to defend Israel's right to exist. Johnson has also argued for American aid to the Ugandan military in their conflict against the Lord's Resistance Army.

Despite Johnson's support for America's alliances with Europe, Israel, Japan and South Korea, he has been strongly opposed to many other conflicts. Johnson was critical of the Iraq War and NATO intervention in Libya. He has also stated that he would be very cautious in dealing with Russia's invasion of Ukraine, believing it is not a significant risk to the United States. Johnson has also argued that the United States should seek a diplomatic solution when dealing with Iran.

Ron Paul's own son, Rand Paul, has also been more supportive of a "realist" foreign policy. Rand Paul has supported the American-led coalition against the Islamic State. Rand Paul has also supported America's alliance with Israel, though he supports major reductions in aid to Israel. Like Gary Johnson, Rand Paul supports the existence of some American military bases in allied countries, though believes that they should be scaled down to a "necessary" size. Unlike Johnson, however, Rand Paul has voiced support for Ukraine following Russia's invasion.

Most libertarians in Europe support the North Atlantic Treaty Organization and close ties with the United States. Prominent British libertarians, such as Daniel Hannan, Nigel Farage and Pat Condell are among a few such NATO supporters. Daniel Hannan has supported Britain's close ties with the United States and the War in Afghanistan, however he opposed the Iraq War. Nigel Farage and the UK Independence Party also support NATO, but have opposed to intervention in Iran, Iraq and Syria. Pat Condell has defended Israel's right to defend itself and has publicly attacked Hamas and Hamas sympathizers.

With libertarians in the free world seemingly shifting from a strictly non-interventionist position to a more "cautious realism" position, I am curious as to what the libertarian members of this board think of American/European foreign policy. Are you supportive of NATO? Israel? South Korea? Taiwan? Is there ever justification for interventionism outside of self-defense? And are there any foreign military bases you would keep open (i.e. Japan, Korea)?