[brigandish]

It's hardly a surprise that someone who believes strongly in personal freedom might fight to defend it for (what are supposedly) liberal societies, especially given that several very large wars of the 20th century (hot and cold) are often described as fights for freedom, and usual for the freedom of of others and of all.

This is basically the default position of every liberal (not in the misapplied American parlance) for at least 150 years now and surely far longer.

“War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things: the decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is worth a war, is much worse. When a people are used as mere human instruments for firing cannon or thrusting bayonets, in the service and for the selfish purposes of a master, such war degrades a people. A war to protect other human beings against tyrannical injustice; a war to give victory to their own ideas of right and good, and which is their own war, carried on for an honest purpose by their free choice, — is often the means of their regeneration. A man who has nothing which he is willing to fight for, nothing which he cares more about than he does about his personal safety, is a miserable creature who has no chance of being free, unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself. As long as justice and injustice have not terminated their ever-renewing fight for ascendancy in the affairs of mankind, human beings must be willing, when need is, to do battle for the one against the other.”

John Stuart Mill, 1862

https://www.bartleby.com/73/1934.html