Yes, I have. Several.
In my humble opinion a critical point of approach for many people can be focusing on the fact that conservatives have opposed interventionism, "we all railed against Clinton for it during his administration..Somalia, Bosnia, Haiti...conservatives in Congress pointed out how these things were unconstitutional - that was the conservative position."
But don't attack them by saying - you used to be believe this so you should believe it again. Instead, I approach more with the observation, like I'm sharing my thoughts, lamenting the thought that conservatives as a whole have been duped into changing their position to an unconstitutional one. It really makes people stop to think as opposed to getting defensive if they're questioned directly.
I've had people come back and point to 9/11 and how that changed things, and I respond with something along the lines of, "but did the world really fundamentally change? Is the world fundamentally really much more scary and dangerous than it was before 2001? wasn't there al queda and bin laden before 9/11? Didn't they believe in the same extreme form of islam back then? We were attacked by them previously, just not on the same scale -- WTC was attacked during Clinton, then there was USS Cole, and possibly even Oklahoma City, but conservatives still believed in the constitution. Even though Clinton wanted to send in troops to Somalia in part because it was a hotbed for terrorists, conservatives still stood by what was right -- saying that interventionism is wrong, nation building is wrong, and policing the world is NOT what we want to be doing. Heck, Bush campaigned specifically based on those conservative principles in 2000, and we supported him because of it!"
