I don't think the empathizes should really be about changing people's minds because trying to debate most of these people is like trying to debate a brick wall.
The problem is that most the vocal anti-war "activists" are NOT really "anti-war". They are simply anti-Bush and anti-America. You're not going to change their mind because they simply hate ANYTHING Bush does. However, the next time a Democrat is in office, these people will be beating down the door to heap praise on him or her for any "preemptive" military action they take "unilaterally". That explains why they were so "outraged" that anyone who DARE question Clinton's TIMING (not the act itself) when he attacked Iraq on the day of his impeachment.
It's been my experience in talking to so-called "anti-war" activists that perhaps 20-30% are GENUINELY anti-war and take a pacifist opinion regardless of which administration is going the war. The other 70-80% are Sore Loserman who are upset that there's no scandals they can use to destroy Bush (they miss Enrongate!) so they are mobilizing to tear him down over a war policy. This is all simply a device they want to use to create dissent and fraction in America so they can humiliate the President. They are actually rooting for Iraq to win just so they can damage Bush's credibility.
Second, I don't think any of us are truly "pro-war", which is the position the anti-war crowed wants to paint us into if we debate them-- i.e., we must be war mongers trying to "rush to war" if we don't agree with the placate Saddem forever crowd. I personally couldn't be happier if war is AVOIDED via Saddem fleeing Iraq or being assassinated prior to a U.S. strike. I'm sure most of us on this forum would share that position.
Essentially, we're taking a pro-choice position on war. It shouldn't necessarily be THE choice in every instance, but the government should have the OPTION of doing so! I find it ironic that most of the "pro-choice" abortion crowd actually gets upset if a woman CHOOSES not have an abortion because she finds another way to take care of the child. I wouldn't be upset if the government CHOSE not to attack Iraq because they found another means of getting rid of Saddem and his weapons. So which one of us is truly "pro-choice"?
These are all valid points, but try having an intelligent debate with the anti-war folks sometime. You'll be shouted down by people who keep screaming "It's all about oil, you U.S. imperialist facist capitalist pig!"
The point being that if they can go out there and get media coverage, then so can we. Big events like these show America that there is a huge segment that DOESN'T agree with the anti-war loonies. Small events may be personally rewarding, but are we REALLY making an impact there?