If Truman refused to use the atomic bomb on Japan, what should he have done instead?

[HardTimes99]

140. I'm not enough of an expert in the time or the Japanese imperial mindset. Either in this

thread or one of the others yesterday, someone posted that the entire idea of 'surrender' was entirely foreign to the Japanese warrior class at the time. According to that DUer, the Japanese mindset, as foreign as it may seem to us, was to 'fight to the last man.' If true, it means that negotiated settlements such as you propose would not have been possible.

Opposed to that, I've seen and read credible reports here that various high-level efforts were being made by the Japanese in the months before Hiroshima to negotiate a peace but on terms that would have allowed Japanese rearmament and no occupation of Japanese lands, i.e., unacceptable terms.

Still, every peace negotiation must begin somewhere, even if neither side's opening position is acceptable to the other side. Given that the final surrender terms allowed Hirohito to remain Emperor, how 'unconditional' were our demands when all is said and done? Seems to me like 'unconditional' is a rhetorical stance, not a negotiating position.