Lebanon rejects initial text of UN ceasefire draft

[bemildred]

Oh yeah, "Gee, who could have predicted this?"

BEIRUT - Lebanon rejects as it stands a draft UN Security Council resolution aiming to bring about a ceasefire with Israel, and wants the text to be amended, a government source told AFP on Saturday.

"The Lebanese government is opposed to the Franco-American draft and has sent Lebanon's representative to the UN, Acting Foreign Minister Tarek Mitri, an amended text which includes Lebanon's demands," the source said.

---

"We are in a defense situation. When the Israeli aggression ceases, very simply, we will stop (fighting) on condition that no Israeli soldier remains inside Lebanese land," Energy Minister Mohamad Fneish said.

"We will not accept that they stay" inside Lebanese territory, he told reporters.

Turkish Press

[partylessinOhio]

1. Well, that makes sense. How could there be a ceasefire with the invader

remaining inside the land invaded? Israel needs to be cut down to size. Our support needs to end now, no more money and no more weapons.

[Ian David]

51. Great idea, Partyless! A Final Solution to the Jewish problem!

:sarcasm:

[Jim__]

2. Good for Lebanon!

Don't let Israel benefit from it s aggression.

[Solo_in_MD]

5. Bad for Lebanon

How would Israel benefit from this settlement? As I understand it:
- They withdraw
- The border is secure
- No more rockets

They would not be acquiring territory or water or anything else.

[Jim__]

21. That is Lebanon's position

"We are in a defense situation. When the Israeli aggression ceases, very simply, we will stop (fighting) on condition that no Israeli soldier remains inside Lebanese land," Energy Minister Mohamad Fneish said.

That's is the right position for Lebanon.

[Solo_in_MD]

30. The Lebanese are not fighting

Their military is yet to fire a shot. Hezbollah, an illegal militia is, in flagrant violation of prior UN direction.

Its also not clear if the energy minister was speaking for the government. IIRC Hezbollah holds a couple of portfolios withing the government. Is he one of them? (I genuinely do not know)

[Jim__]

37. Well, according to the article

"The Lebanese government is opposed to the Franco-American draft and has sent Lebanon's representative to the UN, Acting Foreign Minister Tarek Mitri, an amended text which includes Lebanon's demands," the source said.

Earlier, Prime Minister Fuad Siniora had said the draft was "not adequate."

Is the Lebanese government the Lebanese government?

[Solo_in_MD]

3. Expected

Nasrallah has said he would scorch the earth of Lebanon before Hezbollah would disarm. Since the Lebanese government knows its army can not take on Hezbollah, it can not agree to the terms, though most outsiders would take them as reasonable.

[allemand]

7. No, it has more to do with national sovereignty.

Ghazi Aridi, the Lebanese information minister:

"None of us will give up anything to do with national sovereignty, rights, dignity," he said, affirming the government was committed "to Lebanon's territory, Lebanon's liberation, the withdrawal of the occupation from Lebanese land".
http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/5AEA516B-5199-4477-907B-5E2A4B481A49.htm

[papau]

4. The Lebanese government is not in control of Hez - how can they

pretend they have a country that includes the south under their control?

Indeed once they have control of the south - everyone is happy - except Iran.

[tocqueville]

8. is the Hezbollah from another planet ?

no they are Lebanese and legally elected with the backup of the West that evicted Syria. They abducted 2 soldiers to trade them against illegally abducted Lebanese. That doesn't justify the flattening of a whole country. Make no mistake, nobody is buying the Israeli rethorics except the Bush administration and misinformed Americans.

[Solo_in_MD]

9. No but they are an illegal militia, renounced by the national

government of Lebanon. They are funded and given arms by Syria and Iran. They have refused to disarm despite UN resolutions calling on all militias to disarm. Unfortunately Nasrallah has stated he will scorch the earth of Lebanon before Hezbollah disarms. The Lebanese government can not stand against them without help. In they end Hezbollah will have to disarm for there to be peace.

[Kagemusha]

10. Sadly the truth is in between both your comments

and that's part of why this is hard for the world.

[Solo_in_MD]

12. Indeed

The Hezbollah has a social/political wing and a milita. The former has done good things for the people in So Lebanon, and is a primarily Shia political group. The latter is illegal. Both would disappear if their funding and arms were cut from Syria and Iran. They are not self supporting from southern Lebanon. A decent parallel would be Sinn Fein and the IRA, though there are some differences.

[rustydad]

19. Really?

From a distance I can see little difference between Israel and it's Zionist leaders and Hezbollah. Israel get's it's arms from the USA and essentially free. Iw ould support an arms embargo against all terrorists including the State of Israel. Fat chance. Bob

[cali]

11. It's my understanding

that Israel has very few- like a handful of Lebanese prisoners, and that one of H'zbollah's chief demands concerning prisoners is the release of Samir Kuntar, who murdered a father and his four year old daughter on a raid into Israel.

http://www.samirkuntar.org/english.html

[oberliner]

18. there are 4

Four Lebanese prisoners are being held by Israel, including Samir Kuntar.

[Igel]

20. Kuntar, the poster child for Hezbollah's efforts, is hardly

"illegally abducted Lebanese."

[bemildred]

6. Lebanese reservations on proposed UN resolution

Beirut - A Lebanese official expressed reservations Saturday on a proposal agreed to by the United States and France and being debated in the United Nations Security Council.

'Some points in the proposed resolution are not very clear and need to be cleared,' said the official, who spoke on condition of anonymity. 'The resolution does not call for an immediate ceasefire but for full cessation of hostilities.'

The Lebanese government has said 'in front all diplomats that it demanded an immediate and unconditional ceasefire,' the source said.

The Lebanese Cabinet, which convened late Saturday in an emergency session attended for the first time by the Lebanese army commander, is expected to express 'reservations on some points of the resolution.'

http://news.monstersandcritics.com/middleeast/article_1187410.php/Lebanese_reservations_on_proposed_UN_resolution

[Igel]

22. I'm unclear on the difference

between a ceasefire and a full cessation of hostilities.

To me, they seem to be the same.

If I dial my cynicism to maximum, I can ask, "Are Hezbollah's acts not hostilities?" but that strikes me as an insane question.

Now, "unconditional ceasefire", well, I can see why they'd want that.

[bemildred]

26. Diplomatic language often seeks to be "unclear".

I admit I was puzzled a bit at first too. I think the distinction being made is between whether one must stop shooting permanently ("unconditional cease fire"), or merely stop for a moment before resuming ("cessation of hostilities"). You are correct, I think, that the primary sticking point is the word "unconditional".

Any attempt to leave Israeli troops in Lebanon will also be resisted, and that appears to be the other sticking point.

[Zhade]

28. But didn't the resolution call for all foreign troops not wanted...

...by the Lebanese government to leave?

I doubt the Lebanese government wants the IDF in Lebanon any longer, so do you mean that the sticking point with that is on Israel's side?

[bemildred]

31. One must speculate.

I think the IDF wants a cease fire in place, and the Lebanese want them out. The Lebanese have said they will not stop fighting while they remain. Both have made statements to that effect, the IDF puts it that there is to be a buffer zone and that the IDF will occupy it until replaced by a suitable international force.

[Zhade]

34. If so, can't blame Lebanon. *I* want the IDF gone now, too.

NT!

[rodeodance]

13. Lebanon was not in on the meetings as far as I know.

[Zhade]

14. "...and wants the text to be amended..."

Looking over the provisions, I'm hard-pressed to find Lebanon's objection to the plan. Can someone help me out here?

(Reasoned analysis only, please, racist anti-Arab OR anti-Jewish commentary need not apply.)

[FlavaKreemSnak]

16. Because it says Lebanon cannot fight back

I know that is the American and Israeli policy that anybody that fights back against America or Israel is a terrorist, but the problem is that the people that get bombed don't agree with it. Some of them might even say they don't care if they get called a terrorist they will fight back, because it is just a different point of view. It is more like the point of view you could see Americans having if some other country were bombing and occupying America, even though the other country might say, well you don't have any right to fight us back, I think most Americans would say, oh yes we do!

And it is that difference in points of view that is causing the problem.

[Ghost Dog]

15. Here is the text of the current draft resolution:

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/746660.html

[Zhade]

17. I can kind of understand why the Lebanese government might be pissed.

"Hezbollah's attack on Israel on 12 July 2006, which has already caused hundreds of deaths and injuries on both sides, extensive damage to civilian infrastructure and hundreds of thousands of internally displaced persons,"

It wasn't an attack on Israel. It was a kidnapping. Note that this one act is blamed for all the deaths, etc, on both sides. That's patent bullshit, frankly. Israel shares at least half the blame for its indiscriminate attacks on civilians and infrastructure.


" Mindful of the sensitivity of the issue of prisoners and encouraging the efforts aimed at settling the issue of the Lebanese prisoners detained in Israel,"

So demand that the IDF soldiers be returned, but only encourage that the Lebanese prisoner issue be settled - which doesn't mean returning them (I am aware that some of them are purported to have killed, and I recognize they are a different matter).


"strict respect by all parties for the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Israel and Lebanon;"

Will Israel, desiring the Latani River, go for that? Considering its government's past land grabs, I wonder.

[Igel]

23. Israel's desiring of the Litani is

much overplayed. They drew back once--in an unhappy state, but didn't occupy the land for 18 years.

Gaza they withdrew from. They even ceded land that had legally been bought and paid for, not just seized land.

Even in the West Bank, the only territory not on the table are some built up settlements adjacent to the Green Line, and Jerusalem. With offers of similar land from behind the Green Line to make up the difference. Except for Jerusalem.

The real land grabs, if you want to call them that, occurred in '48; and in later decades entirely inside the Green Line.

[BillZBubb]

25. Baloney.

Your take on the Israeli land and water demands is laughable. "settlements adjacent to the Green line"--yeah right. How about the Shebaa farms? And there is no "table".

Enforce UN 242.

[Igel]

29. Keeping the settlements adjacent to the

Green Line is completely compatible with the English version of 242. Not the French version, or not nearly as cleanly compatible with the French. Not compatible with the most frequent interpretation, but that's not the text.

The French/English disagreement was studiously ignored, and much debated when it was passed. Kick the can. Pernicious habit that, as applied to international politics.

Withdrawing from Gaza land owned by Israel is a clue. I keep hearing people say it wasn't a full withdrawal, but it was a full land withdrawal; control of coast and airspace provides few water resources. With the exception of Jerusalem--for good reason, considering the phenomenal access Jews had during the Arab occupation--and some settlements along the Green Line, the announced policy of Israel is that the rest of the settlements could be dismantled.

Good will. Sorely lacking in many quarters. More precious than water. If they make the offer and it's not sincere, rather than sitting and playing on the 'grasping Jew' meme, wonder what would happen if they were taken up on the idea and reneged.

[Zhade]

35. WTF is this "grasping Jew meme" shit?

No one is saying that, and it's a strawman set up to make others (me, maybe?) look anti-Semitic.

It's dishonest.

[Zhade]

27. Well, they were driven out before, yes.

Hence, your assumption that they don't desire the Latani River, even when the Israeli government has SAID they desire it, is based on a flawed interpretation.

If you doubt the Israeli government's desire to grab up sources of water, you need look no further than the water maps of the "offer" Arafat rejected.

[Ian David]

52. "Grabbing Water." Are they poisoning wells, too?

I love how the age-old blood libels of anti-semitism have been re-packaged into forms more palatable for modern consumption.

You probably didn't even know that you were doing it, so I really don't blame you.

[JackNewtown]

56. Israel is not angelic

We progressives tend to believe in not-so-noble motives in the foreign policy of other nations, including our own, yet we are told by some to believe a desert nation does not desire water despite their being ample evidence, some of which the previous poster noted, that suggests precisely that. To call that anti-Semitic is as incorrect as calling it anti-American to state the US invasion of Iraq was motivated, in part at least, by a desire for Iraqi oil.

You are against out war. Why? What do you think motivated the US to invade Iraq? A desire for valuable resources? ;)

[bemildred]

24. Mideast war rages on despite UN peace resolution

Misleading headline, but what else is new?

---

"We would have liked to see our concerns more reflected in the text," Lebanese Foreign Ministry official Nouhad Mahmoud said at the United Nations.

"Unfortunately, it lacked, for instance, a call for the withdrawal of Israeli forces which are now in Lebanon. That is a recipe for more confrontation," he said.

The draft resolution calls for a "full cessation of hostilities based upon, in particular, the immediate cessation by Hizbollah of all attacks and the immediate cessation by Israel of all offensive military operations".

---

Lebanon wants any U.N. resolution to stick to the terms of a seven-point peace plan that the cabinet, including Hizbollah, has endorsed.

http://today.reuters.com/news/articlenews.aspx?type=topNews&storyID=2006-08-06T004834Z_01_L05688729_RTRUKOC_0_US-MIDEAST.xml

[Solo_in_MD]

32. Hezbollah did not agree to the 7 point plan that came out of

the Lebanese government, specifically the disarming of the illegal Hezbollah militia.

Lebanon wants any U.N. resolution to stick to the terms of a seven-point peace plan that the cabinet, including Hizbollah, has endorsed.

Nasrallah has stated previously stated that Hezbollah would scorch the earth of Lebanon before it disarmed. That requriement alone will stop any of the peace options currently underway, since all of them, even the one from the national government of Lebanon contains that as a key item

[bemildred]

33. Did you make that up yourself or does it come from somewhere? nt

[papau]

36. Perhaps draft Leb 7 pt. plan incl UN Res 1559 which Hez rejected?

Seven Point Plan Peace Proposal of the Provisional Revolutionary Government of the Republic of South Viet Nam, July 1, 1971

oops - wrong Seven Point Plan Peace Proposal
==================================================================

http://www.lgic.org/en/help_1559.php

UN Security Council Resolution 1559 (2004) to end Syrian Occupation Full Text
The Security Council declared on September 2, 2004 its support for a free and fair presidential election in Lebanon conducted according to Lebanese constitutional rules devised without foreign interference or influence and, in that connection, called upon all remaining forces to withdraw from Lebanon.

By a vote of 9 in favour (Angola, Benin, Chile, France, Germany, Romania, Spain, United Kingdom, United States) to none against, with 6 abstentions (Algeria, Brazil, China, Pakistan, Philippines, Russian Federation), the Council adopted resolution 1559 (2004), reaffirming its call for the strict respect of Lebanon’s sovereignty, territorial integrity, unity, and political independence under the sole and exclusive authority of the Government of Lebanon throughout the country.

In a related provision, the Council called for the disbanding and disarmament of all Lebanese and non-Lebanese militias. It also called upon all parties concerned to cooperate fully and urgently with the Council for the full implementation of all its resolutions concerning the restoration in Lebanon of territorial integrity, full sovereignty and political independence.

Resolution

The text of resolution 1559 (2004) reads as follows:

“The Security Council,

“Recalling all its previous resolutions on Lebanon, in particular resolutions 425 (1978) and 426 (1978) of 19 March 1978, resolution 520 (1982) of 17 September 1982, and resolution 1553 (2004) of 29 July 2004 as well as the statements of its President on the situation in Lebanon, in particular the statement of 18 June 2000 (S/PRST/2000/21),

“Reiterating its strong support for the territorial integrity, sovereignty and political independence of Lebanon within its internationally territorially recognized borders,

“Noting the determination of Lebanon to ensure the withdrawal of all non-Lebanese forces from Lebanon,

“Gravely concerned at the continued presence of armed militias in Lebanon, which prevent the Lebanese government from exercising its full sovereignty over all Lebanese territory,

“Reaffirming the importance of the extension of the control of the Government of Lebanon over all Lebanese territory,

“Mindful of the upcoming Lebanese presidential elections and underlining the importance of free and fair elections according to Lebanese constitutional rules devised without foreign interference or influence,

��. Reaffirms its call for the strict respect of the sovereignty, territorial integrity, unity, and political independence of Lebanon under the sole and exclusive authority of the Government of Lebanon throughout Lebanon;

��. Calls upon all remaining foreign forces to withdraw from Lebanon;

��. Calls for the disbanding and disarmament of all Lebanese and non-Lebanese militias;

��. Supports the extension of the control of the Government of Lebanon over all Lebanese territory;

��. Declares its support for a free and fair electoral process in Lebanon’s upcoming presidential election conducted according to Lebanese constitutional rules devised without foreign interference or influence;

��. Calls upon all parties concerned to cooperate fully and urgently with the Security Council for the full implementation of this and all relevant resolutions concerning the restoration of the territorial integrity, full sovereignty, and political independence of Lebanon;

��. Requests that the Secretary-General report to the Security Council within thirty days on the implementation by the parties of this resolution and decides to remain actively seized of this matter.”


IN ANY CASE THE FINAL LEBANESE GOVERNMENT 7 POINT PLAN REJECTS UN RESOLUTION 1559 BUT HAS INDEED BEEN AGREED TO BY Hezbollah.

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-mideast29jul29,1,5477745.story?coll=la-headlines-world

WARFARE IN THE MIDDLE EAST
Israel Rejects Peace Offer
Hezbollah signs on to Lebanon's proposal for a cease-fire and prisoner swap, but disarmament is not included. The pace of diplomacy quickens.
By Rone Tempest and Laura King, Times Staff Writers
July 29, 2006


BEIRUT — <snip>Israel dismissed Hezbollah's offer as disingenuous and said it was an indication of the guerrillas' weakness on the battlefield. But the Shiite Muslim militia's willingness to participate in the initiative shows a flexibility to negotiate not previously evident as the fighting raged in southern Lebanon.

The Lebanese government has proposed a seven-point peace plan, now endorsed by Hezbollah, but it is unlikely to satisfy Israeli or U.S. officials.<snip>

The plan does not call for the multinational force favored by the Bush administration. Instead, it recommends beefing up the existing but largely ineffective 2,000-member U.N. force already in place in the south.

The Lebanese proposal, which seeks an immediate cease-fire, also does not directly address the issue of Hezbollah's disarmament, which Israel, the United States and Britain consider essential to any agreement. It offers to exchange two Israeli soldiers captured by Hezbollah in a cross-border raid July 12 for three Lebanese prisoners held by Israel.

[bemildred]

39. I was asking about "scorch the earth of Lebanon before it disarmed".

The stuff I've seen was weasely about it, while implying that at some distant date in the future Hezbollah would ride off into the sunset, perhaps becoming part of the Lebanese military. "Come on men, our work here is done."

[papau]

41. Arab press has Hez central com Abdullah Kasir saying "never leave"

not never disarm - in the "We will never leave, even if Lebanon is reduced to scorched earth."

But Hez has refused to accept UN Resolution 1559's order to disarm - just not with a "scorched earth" emphasis!

http://www.naharnet.com/domino/tn/NewsDesk.nsf/0/9422F25DB6704A2DC22571AE004CDADE?OpenDocument

Hizbullah rejects ceasefire terms
07.17.06

“We accept no conditions for a ceasefire, whatever the pressure," Abdullah Kasir, a member of Hizbullah's central committee, told AFP.

Asked whether Hizbullah's leader, Hassan Nasrallah, was still in Lebanon despite Israeli efforts to target him, Kasir said that "Hizbullah's leadership and Nasrallah are at the heart of the battle…

"We will never leave, even if Lebanon is reduced to scorched earth."

[bemildred]

44. He misquoted it and twisted the meaning. nt

[Solo_in_MD]

38. Try these for starters..

http://www.khaleejtimes.com/DisplayArticleNew.asp?xfile=data/middleeast/2006/July/middleeast_July327.xml§ion=middleeast

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2089-2291499_2,00.html

Hezbollah is refusing to be disarmed and turn over control of the south to the national government. All of the peace plans, including the one from the Lebanese government require that as does a pre-existing UNSC resolution. This means that the Hezbollah militia is fighting for its existence.

There is also the testosterone angle to consider. Hezbollah is the only force that is perceived by the Arab street as being able to contend with the IDF. That alone means Nasrallah will not allow the militia to be disarmed and disbanded.

Its almost an insoluble problem. If there is no disarmament, there rockets will not stop. If the rockets do not stop, Israel will remain in southern Lebanon and continue air strikes. Hezbollah stepping down is really the required first step in any peace process and clearly they have no interest in doing so.

[bemildred]

40. Please see post #39.

I was looking for that inflammatory quote.

It is indeed an insoluble problem, if what one wants is forced disarmament of Hezbollah. Enjoy the war.

[papau]

42. Post 41 may have your answer :-)

:-)

[bemildred]

43. Right, it is mis-quoted. No threats to scorch the earth of Lebanon.

In fact it is the blowhards in the IDF command that have threatened to "destroy Lebanon's infrastructure" and the like, Hizbullah is just saying that will not force them to quit.

Edit: or I suppose it could just be a poor command of English grammar. But either way it is wrong.

[bemildred]

45. UN peace draft favours Israel

Some clarification of Lebanese objections.

---

The draft called for a "full cessation of hostilities" in Lebanon and gave Israel the right to respond to Hezbollah attacks while withholding that right from the Lebanese group.

---

The draft vowed to work "on a permanent ceasefire for a long-term solution," but officials and observers remained sceptical. It does not give a time for a cessation of hostilities

http://archive.gulfnews.com/region/Lebanon/10057994.html

[Briar]

53. Yes

it's bogus - designed to give the Iraelis more opportunity to reduce Lebanon to rubble while giving the European public the impression that something is being done. Israel is losing this war they've launched so rashly, so they're trying to wring the benefits of a victory out of the UN instead.

[not systems]

46. They should demand war reparations for the...

damage done by this act of aggression.

[bemildred]

47. Mideast war rages on despite resolution

---

"We would have liked to see our concerns more reflected in the text," Lebanese Foreign Ministry official Nouhad Mahmoud said at the United Nations.

"Unfortunately, it lacked, for instance, a call for the withdrawal of Israeli forces which are now in Lebanon. That is a recipe for more confrontation," he said.

---

A senior political source told Reuters in Beirut on Sunday Lebanon "does not agree with the resolution" and would circulate its own proposals among the world body's 15-member council.

Lebanon wants any UN resolution to stick to the terms of a seven-point peace plan that the cabinet, including Hizbollah, has endorsed.

http://www.smh.com.au/news/World/Mideast-war-rages-on-despite-resolution/2006/08/06/1154802733774.html

[bemildred]

48. ANALYSIS: The UN cease-fire proposal needs Hezbollah seal

---

According to press sources in Lebanon, Hezbollah is prepared to accept in the first phase the fundamentals of the Grapes of Wrath Accord, which it signed, indirectly, with Israel in 1996, under which the fire would cease and each side undertakes not to fire at the other side's civilians. But, as in Israel, Hezbollah too is reserving the option to fire at any Israeli force found on Lebanese soil.

Another condition of Nasrallah's is that all Lebanese refugees be allowed to return home. Unless these terms are met, there will be no discussion over the rest of the terms, including the issues of prisoner exchange and Shaba Farms.

Hezbollah's position is not necessarily that of Lebanese Prime Minister Fouad Siniora, who is sticking to his seven-point plan, but is willing to agree to implement them in stages.

First, a total cease-fire, deployment of a multinational force along with the Lebanese army along the border with Israel, and negotiations over exchanging captives and prison inmates. Then the remaining demands: an Israeli withdrawal from Shaba Farms and their placement under international monitoring until they are transfered to Lebanon, return of Lebanese refugees to their homes and Hezbollah's disarmament.

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/746668.html

[rodeodance]

49. AP Lebanon rejects cease-fire resolution

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060806/ap_on_re_mi_ea/mideast_fighting_lebanon;_ylt=Av3MajsxEpHmrrdEX0_28kys0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTA3OTB1amhuBHNlYwNtdHM-

Lebanon rejects cease-fire resolution

By BASSEM MROUE, Associated Press Writer 12 minutes ago

BEIRUT, Lebanon - The Lebanese parliamentary speaker, a prominent Shiite who has been negotiating on behalf of Hezbollah, rejected the U.S.-French draft U.N. cease-fire resolution on Sunday because it did not include the government's plan for ending the fighting.


Nabih Berri said Lebanon would not accept any terms that did not include a government plan calling for an immediate cease-fire and withdrawal of Israeli troops.

"Lebanon, all of Lebanon, rejects any talks or any draft resolution that does not include the seven-point government framework," Berri said at a news conference in Beirut.

Prime Minister Fuad Saniora first offered the plan, later adopted by his Cabinet, during the Rome crisis summit July 26.

The seven-point proposal calls for a mutual release of prisoners held by Israeli and Hezbollah and the withdrawal of Israeli troops from southern Lebanon. It foresees the Lebanese government taking control of southern Lebanon with the help of an international force.

[thepurpose]

50. May be the U.S. and France should have included them in their grand plan

But hey why do that when they haven't included them all along.

[The Stranger]

54. Is wanting to amend the draft the same as "rejection"?

It would appear that, by definition, most of the draft was impliedly "accepted."

So statements like "Oh yeah, Gee, who could have predicted this?" seems well off the mark.

[Tom Joad]

55. You mean they are reserving their right to defend their nation?

imagine that.