::The contributor above almost used the correct word. It should be ''Mokusatsu'' (黙殺), which does mean "to withhold comment" or in even better terms "to kill with silence" - often used in business parlance <ref>http://www.apmforum.com/columns/boye36.htm</ref>. However, it also means "to treat with silent contempt.", but is very different from rejection (''hiketsu'' 否決) (The word comes from ''moku'' = silence and ''satsu'' = kill.). Unfortunately, it comes down to interpretation and context and in this case it was taken to mean that the terms of the Potsdam Declaration had been rejected, rather than they were being considered. <ref>http://www.jstor.org/pss/3635822</ref>. I am sure [[user:RJJensen]] will be able to provide more clarity on this than I can, but those are the basics, with some English documents I found to support.
::Personally, I would rather the bombs had not been dropped, or at worst one dropped offshore would have made quite an impact on an already demoralised population. Dropping both was overkill. Anybody still in favour of atomic weapons should spend a 6<sup>th</sup> August at the Peace Memorial in Hiroshima. --[[User:JessicaT|KotomiT]]<sup>[[User talk:JessicaT|''HajimemashiteHajimemashi<!---->te!'']]</sup> 13:42, 25 September 2008 (EDT) Besides American GI lives, just think of all the Japanese lives that were saved. We lost 4000 GI's the first week of Iwo Jima. An invasion of mainland Japan would have killed 100 times more than two atomic bombs. I would have favored nuc strikes in China for the interference in Korea. It was a problem left for another generation- ours. Now both countries are America's enemy and both coutries have nuc weapons. -- [[Image:50 star flag.png|14px]] [[User:Jpatt|jp]] 14:45, 25 September 2008 (EDT):Do you really consider China to be an enemy, or more of a rival? --[[User:DinsdaleP|DinsdaleP]] 17:20, 25 September 2008 (EDT)
===="Quickly"====
==References==
{{Reflist}}
[[Category:Conservapedia Debates]]