I too am against war - ie, I don't like it, I'd rather not have it, it's against my religious upbringing and everything I believe in.
I also don't like poverty, selfishness, gluttony, arrogance, violence, abortion, the death penalty, taxes, starvation, illness, and the speed of light as an ultimate limit to speed of movement.
But, getting back to the question of war, although I clearly don't want it, I can see that the question can become quite complicated if asked in a different way, like this:
Let's assume for a moment that I am asked to choose between war now, or soon, and a future where Iraq, North Korea, Iran, and a few other choice members of the UN have, use, and actively market weapons of mass destruction, including nuclear, to the likes of UBL et al.
Now, that's a very complicated, or simple, decision, depending on how you look at it. I have to acknowledge that this future may be worse than war - maybe. And I say that because, somewhere deep inside me I believe that slavery is worse than war, far worse.
What if the US and Britain and a few others had fought to stop Hitler in 1938? Many, hundreds, of my relatives would have lived a normal life - and some of them, including their kids, would still be alive. Now, that's something important.
What if the US had done the same to Russia in the 50s? Nuclear war, worldwide destruction, lots of bad stuff, right?
What I mean is that my anti-war thoughts invariably lead me to the question of whether I trust our current government and the information I get from the media. How bad is the situation, REALLY?
Imo, that's the basic, central question.
When I feel I want to express my anti-war sentiments, I see myself being long on "don't"s and short on "lets do this instead." Yes, war is horrifyingly terrible, but what should we do instead? I am not certain. I just feel that I don't EVER want to be under Saddam's or UBL's thumb.
Imo, again, that's a huge problem. Still working on it.