I would note a difference. I'm not against the US military using its capabilities to inhibit Syria from using internationally sanctioned chemical weapons against its enemies, however, I'm against direct military action against Assad and in support of the rebels as I'm not really sure the rebels are any better than Assad is. A civil war is regional politics and based on our success in Egypt, Iraq, and Lybia, we've proven that while we can ensure one side wins, we are terrible at confirming that we actually wanted that side in power in the first place.
And before some liberal nutjob uses this explanation as my justification for bombing NK, I'd note that Assad actually USED his weapons. For all the bluster from NK, they've presently haven't done more than hiss and bark.