I think you're mixing up "liberal" with "radical", or possibly "expansive" or "expansionist".

"Radical" is the correct term, although it isn't synonymous with Liberal (really, trust me!). Bush's foreign policy isn't just out of character for a Republican President, it's out of character for an American President of the last 100 years.

You have to go back to 1900 for a parallel, and it's a fascinatingly parallel:

In 1900 William McKinley was running for reelection. McKinley had successfully prosecuted the Spanish-American War, which was won in just four months and was dubbed a "splendid little war." But, perhaps emboldened by the support he received from the first little war, McKinley decided launch a second war--this one to "liberate" the Philippines. By 1900, 120,000 American troops were bogged down in an occupation of the Philippines, and 4,200 American soldiers had been killed by insurgents who did not appreciate McKinley's attempt to occupy their country....McKinley argued that he was trying to help the Filipinos. He told a group of his fellow Methodists gathered at the White House that he was intent on bringing Christianity to the Philippines. The astonished guests were too polite to point out that the Philippines had been evangelized by the Spanish some three hundred years earlier.