Not for every dot and comma but for the general spirit informing it, I draw your attention to this column by Sebastian Junger:
To one degree or another, every person has an obligation to uphold human dignity in whatever small way he or she can. It is this concept of dignity that has given rise to international laws protecting human rights, to campaigns for prison reform, to boycotts against apartheid.
More particularly, this bit hits the nail on the head in identifying the way the term 'antiwar' has been appropriated by people who are not much exercised either about war in general or about a lot of specific wars:
Much of the so-called antiwar movement seems only to protest against wars waged by the US, Britain and Israel; wars waged by dictatorial regimes, whether externally, or internally against sections of their own population, don't spur it to the same oppositional passion or mobilization.
I cannot think of any moral definition of "antiwar" that includes simply ignoring the slaughter of civilians overseas.
(Loosely apropos, at Onpoint here you can listen to Michael Walzer - who hitherto has been opposed to US military intervention in Syria - explaining why he favoured the limited strike President Obama was threatening in response to the Syrian regime's use of chemical weapons to kill civilians.)