The US military is largely an apolitical organization. It has members spanning the spectrum of political orientations, and many of its members are indeed libertarians. A lot of them become disillusioned about the U.S.A. at some point in their lives, like McVeigh did, and others differentiate between things like the police enforcing drug laws and soldiers in the military fighting enemy armies or terrorists. Of course innocents are killed by the US military, but that is largely an artifact of war. If the USA had no military force it is reasonable to assume that it would be stripped of much of its power and possibly invaded and taken over by foreign agencies. The US military has taken part in horrible actions certainly, but there are indeed many members who do not condone such things and who are indeed libertarians. On the other hand, there are no DEA agents who are libertarians, being a willing member of the DEA for the purpose of drug enforcement (as opposed to, for example, intelligence gathering as a mole) prohibits somebody from also being a libertarian.  McVeigh was extremely libertarian. He was against drug criminalization, he was against gun control and he was against the federal government. In addition to this, he had a history of voting libertarian, which pretty conclusively labels him as politically libertarian. He targeted the Murrah federal building because it was used by the DEA as well as the ATF. He did later regret his target choice due to the innocent deaths he caused, and said if he had to do it over again that he would have sniped government officials and other similar targets instead. Although I also disagree with his choice of target, I can understand why he selected it. When the murderers in the US military, as you have called them, attack foreign countries and specific targets, they often bring about the deaths of innocents, something that is called collateral damage. You see, after having served in the military McVeigh actually became opposed to the concept of collateral damage, and I believe that he wanted to show the American population that collateral damage was something they should see as unacceptable. He did this by causing the deaths of innocents in addition to the primary targets of his bombing, namely federal law enforcement agents. To quote him: I agree that collateral damage should be minimized at all costs. I also agree that warring populations use things such as children as shields, and as a form of propaganda after they are attacked in such a way that the children die. I would also like to point out that the U.S. military in the past has fought in wars that most people accept as necessary and even as highly honorable, for example world war II. In the wars that received the least popular support, such as Vietnam, the government was forced to enslave people to fight for them via draft law. Of course, there were other organizations that opposed this, one that comes to mind being the Weather Underground Organization, which bombed several government buildings in protest of the slavery perpetuated onto the U.S. people by the government. Of course they are called terrorists for bombing government buildings, but the government is not a terrorist organization for forcing young men to die in a war that they did not want to fight.