It looks like the anti-war left vanished, but it didn’t. It just showed its true colors. It isn’t so much anti-war as anti-Republican.
(1) When a Democrat wants to go into a Middle Eastern country because a tyrant gassed a few hundred of his own citizens, the anti-war left doesn’t say a word, even if the Democrat has to go it alone, and even if the Democrat intends to leave the murdering tyrant in place. But when a Republican wants to go into a Middle Eastern country because a tyrant gassed more than 5,000 of his own citizens and 50,000 citizens of another country, and even though the Republican has built a multi-national coalition for the purpose, the anti-war left goes all peacenik on us, even though the Republican gets the tyrant removed -- from earth, and even though the Republican declined to blame it all on an internet video no one involved ever saw. The anti-war left opposed that war even after they voted for it. They are silent about this war, even if no one votes for it.
(2) The WMDs that Assad is using on his own Syrian citizens are the WMDs that, according to one of Saddam Husseins’s generals, were shipped from Iraq to Syria before we invaded Iraq to find them. If you want proof that Saddam had WMDs, then read the daily news reports from Syria -- and read the book by that Iraqi general -- Georges Sada. The book is called called Saddam’s Secrets. It details the time, place, number, and destination of more than 30 shipments of WMDs from Iraq to Syria, with the help of the Russians, who (not surprisingly) are now supporting the Syrians against us.
Please do recall that when Democrats intervene in other countries, things often go desperately wrong because the Democrats do not know not what they are doing, period. Jimmy Carter throws the shah of Iran under the bus, and the ayatollahs take over. Obama aids in the so-called Arab Spring in Egypt and Mubarak is deposed. In his place the Muslim Brotherhood comes to power. At least the Egyptians themselves now realize their error and have deposed the MB and released Mubarak. They learned their error even if Obama has not. In Libya, while leading from the rear, Obama helped depose Muammar Gaddafi. Then Benghazi happened and Obama blamed a video. The man is not ready for prime time. Statesmanship is not what they teach in community organizer school. His world-shaking incompetence does not matter to the anti-war left. All that matters is party affiliation. Oh, did I mention Anastasio Samoza?
Why does the anti-war left go silent and blind? They do it because their guy is in charge. As Democrat Congresswoman Eleanor Holmes Norton confessed, she'd support the war in Syria simply because it's Obama's. For the left, everything is about partisanship, not principle. It’s a tactic and a ploy the anti-war left learned from the feminist left. for example, if a Democrat (A) is accused of rape, (B) is accused of indecent exposure and groping multiple times, (C) employs power advantages over an intern for sexual purposes and then (D) lies about it under oath so that he is both impeached and disbarred, and if he (E) attacks the reputation of the innocent women who accused him, the feminist left doesn’t mind at all. It’s hear no evil; see no evil; say no evil. But if women raise accusations against Republicans -- especially if those Republicans are black -- then the feminists go ballistic.
In short, with the feminist left, it’s not about women; it’s about partisanship. With the anti-war left, it’s not about war; it’s about partisanship.
PS: The anti-war left is silent even though Syria threatens to attack Turkey, Lebanon, Israel, and Jordan if the US strikes. We do not know what Syria's most ardent supporters, Russia and Iran, will do in that case. One hesitates to think how bad things might get if Obama strikes. We do know that if Israel is attacked, it will respond accordingly. The Middle East is a tinder box and Obama's foreign policy is an open flame.
Or, consider it from anther perspective: If you are a football coach, you don't tell the other team what your next few plays will be. But if you are Barack Obama, you do. In war, that gives the other side plenty of time to hide the weapons and persons you target. After being tipped off as to Obama's intentions, the regime in Syria has dispersed its assets and hidden them in civilian population centers where Syria knows we are not likely to strike, thus securing those assets from damage. For that reason, our strikes, being telegraphed in advance, will serve little, if any, positive purpose.