We have to consider our position while closely watching the situation and continuing to collect all relevant information.

"are you suggesting someone should have ordered a military strike on Tokyo after the sarin attack?"

No (sigh), the Tokyo attacks are a reminder that we are all at risk of chemical-biological attacks, regardless of where we are in the world and how safe we may feel.

We are all at risk of all kinds of things. I don't see how having had home-grown nutters seeding the underground with sarin makes Japan obliged to support the US dropping bombs on people guilty of nothing more than having the bad luck to live in a place where a civil war has erupted. The people who arranged/ordered the use of chemical weapons in Syria will have made sure that they are in a safe place; military strikes are not going to punish them. If you want to punish them, drag them up before a court, present the evidence for all to see, either convict or acquit them and if convicted, pass sentence. That's what happened to the sarin nutters in Japan, it's what should happen to the sarin nutters in Syria.

What exactly would you have Japan do?

"are you suggesting someone should have ordered a military strike on Tokyo after the sarin attack?"

No (sigh), the Tokyo attacks are a reminder that we are all at risk of chemical-biological attacks, regardless of where we are in the world and how safe we may feel.

The US strike is not about fixing Syria. It's about the universal "red line," the principle that anyone who willfully uses these really, really scary weapons deserves harsh punishment from the world community, to the extent they won't be willing to try using them again.

Many analysts say that if there's an armageddon, it would like be caused by chemical and biological weapons, not nuclear weapons, because they are relative cheap and easy to make and deliver. In Tokyo's case, delivery was plastic bags and they were made by a bunch of doomsday nutters in the forests of Yamanashi Prefecture.

our peace constitution does not allow us to take part in wars. Therefore, we are morally obligated not to endorse anyone else's wars.

That's what he should have said.

Japan, having also suffered deadly nerve gas attacks in its recent history, has a moral obligation to support the military strike.

I'm not sure if you're trying to be funny, but assuming that you're not, are you suggesting someone should have ordered a military strike on Tokyo after the sarin attack? Actually, that clarifies nicely how ridiculous the idea of a strike on Syria is/would be.

Japan, having also suffered deadly nerve gas attacks in its recent history, has a moral obligation to support the military strike.

"We have to consider our position while closely watching the situation and continuing to collect all relevant information..."

This is exactly what I used to do at the bars, and never once did I manage to meet any girls. You connect the dots.

How to say nothing in so many words. How about saying our peace constitution does not allow us to take part in wars. Therefore, we are morally obligated not to endorse anyone else's wars.

But the Abe government will never say that.

So how about this. We have avoided military adventures in the Middle East and there we are not a terrorist target. Furthermore, you have good relations with all Middle Eastern nations. We would like to keep things the way they are and so we won't engage in or endorse any military action by the US in Syria.

Abe might find a convoluted way saying that. Don't forget he has just finished shilling for Japan's nuclear industry in the Middle East.

face saving effort since UK has backed down? Abe had already supported it few days back, source: NHK.

Maybe go to Yasukuni to pray for guidance?