Reason magazine is, in my opinion, one of the best magazines in existence at the moment. For those of you not familiar it is sort of a cross between Shermer's Skeptic magazine and the Cato Institute's journals. It promotes 'free minds and free markets'. For the most part they live up to their claims, critiquing pseudoscience and mysticism in a manner that makes Penn & Teller's "Bullshit" seem half-assed and attacking interventionism and anti-capitalism with the same thouroughness and zeal.
But there's a problem: they're not isolationists. I think that classical liberalism alone established why the State should not have the power to go to war, and modern libertarianism, individual anarchism and Austrian economics have simply reinforced this. But despite this huge backing of anti-war tradition in the philosophy they promote many of their articles about the 'War on Terror' and Iraq are essentialy pro-War and somewhat Pro-Administration.
Now I understand that there were some Pro-War Objectivists, and I really don't expect any better from Republicrat douche-bags, but why is it that possibly the most important major supporter of free markets and rational thought is doing exactly what the left always accuse capitalists of: promoting the violation of civil liberties, the robbery and enslavement of the masses and the imperialistic murder for the purposes of the Military-Industrial Complex.

Well, as a pro-war but anti-administration fellow, I can understand them being in favor of defending ourselves... but just how pro-administration are they? Are they "into" the nonsense of "nation building?"