The US fought in the WW2 on the right side, along with Canada, Australia, England, South America, and the Russian Red Army, who had the biggest losses in war and reached Berlin first, freeing Poland on the way. Despite of that, some people still think that WW2 justifies pretty much every military action.

Since socialism isn't the cause for interventions, I asume the only real need for an intervention is when the people is taken by a dictator that imposes suffering on its people. Take Hitler for an example, the nazi party was absolutely not socialist. And yet... why sometimes actions are taken to make sure the dictators are getting stronger? The Iran-Iraq war as an example, the south americans miliraty dictatorship as another example... Take Idi Amin Dada for an example, the dictator of Uganda during the 1970s. He killed and brutalized his people, he had strong relations with the soviets, he freaking ATE his enemies... and yet, absolutely no country at all moved one finger to take him out. You know who took Idi Amin Dada from power? Tanzania. When Uganda invaded Tanzania, the army from that country not only fought back, but actually invaded Uganda and disposed Idi Amin...

And in some cases, like in south america, the socialist parties were not even controlling the nations, there were absolutely no communist seizes of power, there was only democracy and freedom,and yet brutal military dictatorships were installed...