Hugo Grotius, discloses the 17th citi performing arts center wang theatre spells out century Dutch philosopher who laid the foundations for international law, wrote that "it be lawful to kill him who is preparing to kill," although he also acknowledged that this principle could be dangerous. Bush's claim was that whereas "preparing to kill" once entailed mobilizing armies that could be spotted by the potential victim, today's technology makes possible a devastating blow without any visible prelude. Hence, he argued, preemption had to be understood more broadly. In non-legalese, he put it: "We will not allow the world's most dangerous regimes to threaten us with the world's most dangerous weapons. "Critics argued that Bush was advocating not preemption but "preventive war. " They said that using force to deny another state the capability to attack you was far different from using force to thwart an imminent attack. They asked what would be the limits of such a right, and to this Bush had no ready answer. Last month, one of the more mysterious episodes in the history of the Arab-Israel conflict began to leak slowly into the news. Although the facts are still unconfirmed, what seems to have happened has major implications not only for the region but even more for the laws of war and preemption that President Bush has been trying to redefine ever since his 2002 national security strategy paper. First, Syrian spokesmen complained that Israeli planes had violated their country's airspace on Sept 6 -- and had been driven off, or so they said. Within a few days came stories -- mostly from anonymous sources -- that the planes had fired into Syria; these were followed by still other stories that a target had in fact been hit. But what was it?After further journalistic digging, the most plausible accounts said that the Syrian targets were related to nuclear weapons activity and may even have been manned by North Koreans Later reports suggest some dispute within the U. S.

government about how far Syria had progressed in achieving its nuclear ambitions, but these same reports confirm that this is what Israel was targeting. The obscurity of this episode results in part from uncharacteristically tight lips in Jerusalem and Damascus But that is not the whole of the reason. There has also been a deafening silence from the international community and especially from the other states of the region performing arts . This highly unusual reaction is one of the oddest parts of the whole episode and, in some ways, the most meaningful. Ordinarily, the Arab states in the region are quick to condemn any warlike act by Israel, even measures as defensive as building a barrier against terrorists theater seating . Although many Arab states are unhappy these days with Syria's budding alliance with Iran, Israel is still, to one degree or another, the enemy, and Syria is, at worst, a wayward brother theater tickets . So why were the Arab states suddenly mum about this invasion of Syria's sovereignty?Their reticence -- and that of the rest of the international community, including the United States and Western Europe -- suggests, I think, that even though most governments believed that this was indeed a blow against Syrian nuclear ambitions, none of them, frankly, were displeased to see it happen. The fact is that virtually every government in the world, regardless of its feelings about Israel, recognizes that a Syrian nuclear weapons program would make the Middle East and the world more dangerous. True, Israel already has such weapons, to the dismay of many others, especially its neighbors.

But few see a Syrian nuclear arsenal as an antidote. Syria has a history of belligerence . Apart from initiating war against Israel in 1948 and 1973, and helping provoke it in 1967, it has also occupied Lebanon, and it threatened to invade Jordan during "Black September" of 1970 until deterred by U. S and Israeli counteraction wang theater . It also helps arm Hezbollah and succors other violent groups. Even a more sympathetic interpretation of Syria's past actions would not diminish the terrifying prospect of a nuclear rivalry in the region childrens theater . Just this summer, rumblings of a possible war had military leaders on edge in Damascus and Jerusalem theater . Replay that scenario with both sides armed with nuclear weapons, and it becomes far scarier still. Between these two small, contiguous states, there would be little room for a "second strike" doctrine of the kind that deterred war between the superpowers for five decades. In a crisis, each side's strategists would have to weigh carefully the advantages of striking first and wonder whether the other was thinking the same thing. In addition, a Syrian nuclear program would stimulate wider proliferation Citi Performing Arts Center - Wang Theater . The prospect of an Iranian bomb has stirred new interest in nuclear programs in Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Turkey and other nearby states.

Were Syria to head in the same direction, the impetus to avoid being left behind would be intense. What does all this have to do with Bush's preemption doctrine? Although the president's stand evoked more criticism than support, part of it was hard to gainsay . The right of self-defense has always been understood to include the possibility of preemptive self-defense performing arts center . Hugo Grotius, the 17th century Dutch philosopher who laid the foundations for international law, wrote that "it be lawful to kill him who is preparing to kill," although he also acknowledged that this principle could be dangerous. Bush's claim was that whereas "preparing to kill" once entailed mobilizing armies that could be spotted by the potential victim, today's technology makes possible a devastating blow without any visible prelude citi performing arts center . Hence, he argued, preemption had to be understood more broadly performing arts theater . In non-legalese, he put it: "We will not allow the world's most dangerous regimes to threaten us with the world's most dangerous weapons. "Critics argued that Bush was advocating not preemption but "preventive war. " They said that using force to deny another state the capability to attack you was far different from using force to thwart an imminent attack. They asked what would be the limits of such a right, and to this Bush had no ready answer. On the other hand, the critics had no answer to Bush's point that modern technology created a new danger of a devastating surprise attack against which states would reasonably want some defense. The U. N. 's High-Level Panel on Threats, Challenges and Change acknowledged the force of the argument that "the potential harm from some threats (e. g. , terrorists armed with a nuclear weapon) is so great that one simply cannot risk waiting until they become imminent. " However, it said that in such cases, the party feeling threatened should bring its concern before the Security Council. But given the United Nations' bias against Israel, it is hard to counsel Jerusalem to trust the Security Council.

Indeed, given the council's historic impotence, few states would be likely to rely on it if they believed their safety was at stake. The dilemma of preemption that first troubled Grotius has grown more acute with time . Israel was condemned by the Security Council in 1981 for bombing Osirik to abort Iraq's nuclear program, but when Saddam Hussein launched wars against Iran and Kuwait, many governments were pleased in retrospect that Israeli had pulled some of his fangs. This latest episode suggests that an intense rethinking is underway in many capitals performing arts center tickets . Take away the nuclear issue and imagine a report that Israeli warplanes had flown over Syria, unprovoked, and had bombed ordinary military targets center for the performing arts . The Arab states would have been up in arms, seconded by the other Muslim and "nonaligned" states and even Europe performing art center . The United States in all likelihood would have chastised Israel more gently and would probably have abstained, rather than vetoing a Security Council condemnation of Israel. But instead, Israel received only pro forma rebukes -- apparently because it had blocked a weapon that no one wanted Damascus to have. Law is largely a matter of practice and custom, and it is gradually changing to accommodate new realms of self-defense. Had American forces found nuclear weapons in Iraq, or a nuclear program nearly ready to produce weapons, the international assessment of our decision to invade would be very different today. That we made an appalling mistake about Iraqi WMD shows the risks of the new doctrine that Bush proposes -- but it does not diminish the issue that gave rise to that doctrine. The evolution of our thinking about these issues will be at the forefront of the debate as Washington moves closer to a preemptive (or "preventive") strike against Iran's nuclear program. .

"Marriage, Iranian Style" is a most effective comedy, full of warmth and affection, that at the same time is remarkably daring, considering the tenseness of U. S. -Iranian relations . It is old-fashioned entertainment, rich in familiar comical types, lush settings and locales, yet for all its humor has a timely subtext tinged with melancholy over East-West relations. Shirin Sar-poulaki (Shila Khodadad) is the highly sheltered daughter of a wealthy carpet dealer (Dariush Arjmand) of a fine old Tehran family steeped in tradition center for performing arts . Arjmand's Haj Ebrahim is a bearded bear of a man with a deep, booming voice and an authoritarian manner theater seating chart . His devoted wife, Akram (Fatemeh Goudarzi), has, with much deft cajoling and the help of her brother Saeed (Saeed Kangarini), persuaded him to allow Shirin to take a job at Saeed's large travel agency. In walks David (Daniel Holmes), an American information technologist with a major U. S firm, who takes one look at Shirin and is transfixed shubert theater . Saeed arranges a tour for David and his colleagues and selects his niece to serve as a guide because of her fluency in English Citi Performing Arts Center - Wang Theater - citicenter . Her aghast father calls her on her cellphone almost hourly and even assigns his son to spy on her. But Shirin is attracted to David, an unassuming man who has become increasingly drawn to art rather than science and has developed a special interest in Persian culture. Citi Performing Arts Center - Wang Theater tickets At first director Hassan Fat-Hi and writer Minoo Farshchi poke gentle fun at Haj Ebrahim's overprotectiveness of his daughter and then do the same with his extreme paranoia toward David.

"Marriage, Iranian Style" finds humor in just about every situation, yet in doing so reveals the dicey status of women in Iran, who live lives so subservient to men they become consumed with both pleasing them and outmaneuvering them . And for all its amusing exaggeration, Haj Ebrahim's paranoia becomes a commentary on the gravity of the deep distrust between the U. S and Iran performing art . The filmmakers, however, do not forget they're making a comedy, and the film's serious undertow sets off the absurdity of so much of human behavior and belief. Not surprisingly, Holmes is not an American but a Canadian performing arts theatre . He is not a professional actor but has lived his role, having come to Iran, fallen in love with an Iranian woman and converted to Islam . Also not surprisingly, "Marriage, Iranian Style" was initially banned in Iran and reportedly was released only when Holmes' role was greatly reduced, which can only have had a deleterious effect on the film and its conciliatory spirit. *'Marriage, Iranian Style'MPAA rating: UnratedA Bita Films release Director Hassan Fat-Hi Producer Ali Moallem Screenplay Minoo Farshchi Cinematographer Kazem Shahbazi Editor Mostafa Khergheh-poosh In Farsi and English, with English subtitles. Running time: 1 hour, 50 minutes. Exclusively at the Music Hall, 9036 Wilshire Blvd. , Beverly Hills, (310) 274-6869; and the Town Center 5, 17200 Ventura Blvd. , Encino (818) 981-9811. Citi Performing Arts Center - Wang Theater - citicenter . "UNCLE, is the shark really special to our family?" asked Pualani. "Yes.