▁ ▁My ▁thinking ▁is ▁that ▁the ▁joint ▁declaration ▁is ▁virt ually ▁the ▁same ▁as ▁the ▁earlier ▁declaration . ▁The ▁government ▁of ▁Japan ▁does ▁not ▁consider ▁it ▁having ▁any ▁cru cial ▁value . ▁We ▁simply ▁. ▁The ▁only ▁alternative ▁for ▁us ▁is ▁to ▁be ▁determined ▁to ▁continue ▁our ▁fight ▁to ▁the ▁end . ▁ ▁Su zu ki ▁apparently ▁recognized ▁that ▁the ▁P ots dam ▁declaration ▁flag ged ▁an ▁intention ▁to ▁end ▁a ▁war ▁which , ▁in ▁ ▁log ist ical ▁terms , ▁Japan ▁was ▁no ▁longer ▁capable ▁of ▁sust aining . ▁However ▁Article ▁ 6 ▁stated ▁that ▁the ▁militar ists ▁would ▁be ▁stri pped ▁of ▁their ▁authority ▁and ▁power ▁forever , ▁and ▁the ▁Japanese ▁army ▁was ▁resol utely ▁opposed ▁to ▁its ▁own ▁thorough ▁dis m ant lement , ▁and ▁heavy ▁pressure ▁was ▁brought ▁to ▁bear ▁on ▁the ▁Prime ▁Minister ▁therefore ▁to ▁have ▁him ▁reject ▁the ▁declaration . ▁ ▁Su zu ki ' s ▁stating ▁that ▁the ▁declarations ▁terms ▁would ▁be ▁literally ▁' kil led ▁off ▁by ▁silent ▁cont empt '( m ok us ats u ) ▁reflected ▁this ▁necessity ▁of ▁pla c ating ▁the ▁extreme ▁position ▁of ▁the ▁army . ▁John ▁Tol and ▁also ▁argued ▁dec ades ▁later ▁that ▁Su zu ki ' s ▁choice ▁of ▁the ▁term ▁was ▁dict ated ▁more ▁by ▁the ▁need ▁to ▁appe ase ▁the ▁military , ▁which ▁was ▁host ile ▁to ▁the ▁idea ▁of ▁" un cond itional ▁surrender ", ▁than ▁to ▁signal ▁anything ▁to ▁the ▁Al lies . ▁ ▁Although ▁m ok us ats u ▁may ▁not ▁have