Obama killed the antiwar movement. Its been exposed as just an anti-Bush/GOP movement. Obama has the US in two more wars and barely a peep out of the libs. Not even for the "Death Squad" photos in Afghanistan made a ripple with the left and MSM. If that happened under Bush it would have been death squad 24/7. The left never cared about Iraq or troop/civilian deaths. Now Obama is using US troops and wealth to put the anti-American and anti-Israel Islamists in power. The people who cheered 9-11 and Locerbie now have US running interference for them - and the US libs are quite ok with that
You don't seem to understand some things, one of which is the dynamic of our two-party system, that when the 'anti-war' guy wins, but isn't all that anti-war, the anti-war people don't have all that much leverage. Remember, the other guy was the one singing "bomb bomb bomb, bomb bomb Iran", and it wasn't ironic. It's not all that easy for the anti-war people to replace the incumbent president with a more anti-war one - Dennis Kucinich ran and lost.
Another is your deceptive framing, such as implicitly equating the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan with the ones in Libya and Yemen, just counting them as 'two more wars' like there's no difference and not a word about the fact that there's basically no comparison between the two in terms of the US activities. We've have IIRC over 6,000 killed in Iraq and about 1,600 in Afghanistan, not to mention millions displace, hundreds of thousands we killed - how many Americans killed in Libya and Yemen?
As to your distortions of the US policy - you are attacking democracy. If democracy in a country means a Muslim government, of whatever flavor, that's what it means.
You are implicitly saying it's better for us to destroy democracy and back another dictator who puts us ahead of the people of the country. No, thanks.
When a foreign government is a real threat, we can take more action. When we can practically intervene for humanitarian need, ok. We don't need to be tyrants.