The richest are the most generous? I think not.

[Tiberius]

Currently I have little to no say on where my taxes go.

Now if you could just extend that idea to all the wars that the republibertarianeo-conazis start I might go for it. But it never does seem to work that way, does it?

You know Minimalist, a bit of fact checking here and there never goes amiss.

Section 3.0 of the Libertarian Party manifesto reads:

3.0 Securing Liberty

The protection of individual rights is the only proper purpose of government. Government is constitutionally limited so as to prevent the infringement of individual rights by the government itself. The principle of non-initiation of force should guide the relationships between governments.

Section 3.1 reads:

3.1 National Defense

We support the maintenance of a sufficient military to defend the United States against aggression. The United States should both avoid entangling alliances and abandon its attempts to act as policeman for the world. We oppose any form of compulsory national service.

Bolding mine. Libertarians are anti-war; we oppose starting wars for any reason other than self defense (i.e. we are attacked or suspect we are about to be attacked). The Libertarian Party were one of the first political parties in the US to condemn the war in Afghanistan and Iraq.

I've said it before and I'll say it again; your "republibertarianeo-conazis" are a figment of your imagination. They don't exist in reality. Call Republicans what they are: Republicans. Call Libertarians what they are: Libertarians. Call Neo-Cons what they are: Neo-Cons. Call Nazis what they are: Nazis. But don't think you can get away with merging all four into one single entity, and then apply it to a conversation as if there are actual examples of them.