The ice skating experience

The skating rink has been around downtown for awhile, but I didn't have the courage and company to attempt something I never have. So finally today with exceptionally warm weather(18 degC, would you believe it, a swing of 28 degC!) and enticing Ch to accompany me, I tried it out.

After the walk to the rink via East Exchange, we(I) took out two pairs of skates for a rent of $2. The blades are as thick as the hardbound cover of a notebook(in India) and distinguising left from right took some trying on. The size I picked was too tight, so I had to come out of the rink, change to my shoes, go back and exchange them for a looser size. The left-right conundrum was even worse for this pair, being confirmed only after stepping into the rink and checking standing on one foot if I was wearing the right one.

Being a beginner, both of us were sidelined to the barriers hanging on for dear life. Walking outside on the special rubber matting(so that the blades don't blunt) was easy but not comfortable; skating on ice was beyond that. 'Walking' by landing on the back of the blade and pushing forward with the tip wasn't working; so by observation and credit to TV, the trick is to push sideways - and keep a forward centre of gravity. If it falls back you will be swinging your arms struggling to regain control.

If you somehow fall forward and you get your hands on the ice -it's the ultimate fall. Recovering from that pose, with hands on the ice, is very very difficult for the simple fact that friction doesn't give a damn. Thank goodness for the volunteer who got me back on my feet.

And then Ch was banged into by a tiny kid, which led to her moving to the barriers where she sadly lost her footing and slightly sprained her knee. She was fine, no problems there, but it took some time traversing the barrier all the way to the exit excusing ourselves through the non-starters clung to the barrier. After a 5 min break where she removed her skates for good and felt walkable again, I felt I hadn't had enough and headed back to the rink.

It was better now; I could accelerate well; I did have to head to the barriers occasionally to gather my confidence and do a few more circles.

A couple of circles later I was done and moved to the exit, where I fell and nearly twisted my knee. On the rubber. It's embarrasing enough to fall, but moreso on the rubber rather than the ice. Blame it all on the gentle slope-step out from the rink. Nothing more than pain for a few minutes.

And that was the end of a memorable first time trip to the skating rink. A few photos around the German market, carousel and Christmas lights later we took the walk back home... with a smile.

I can skate on ice!!

PS. The ice is maintained by a refrigerating unit with pipes running under the ice, not by natural formation.

Anniyan ending discussion

The ending of Shankar and Vikram's mega entertainer Anniyan is open for interpretation in different ways.

I would say that the evil Vikram took over the softer personality - in order to be released from prison - because that was the only way he could continue to fulfill his goals. It makes sense, a non-resurgence of the evil side would have him released and then he would be a free man. This, is a very sinister and hair raising plot.

Another opinion is that he still wasn't fully cured, and he is still in his old state, with the occasional recurring disorder. In my opinion this does not seem to make a fit ending, but the discussion continues....

Edit1: In response to Blany's comment I will detail my first suggestion.
All through the film the Anniyan appears when something bad is happening. In the end, the guy who was drinking is missing and Sada sees Vikram smiling, in good character standing by the door. When she hugs him, Vikram suddenly becomes the Anniyan and throws the drunkard off the train. So there is a sudden change in character, with the intent of not revealing to other persons the goings on. Hence the evil Vikram has taken over the good Vikram and appears at the evil character's own willing.

Though, if Blany is right, this may not be psychologically possible, I would love to believe it could happen. It makes a fantastic ending.

Ghajini - Asin special

A comment on Ghajini, Hindi, 2008 follows.

I was amazed at Asin's performance - it is an unbridled, hands on rendering leaving me flattered. All her earlier films don't seem to have allowed her to free her self - if ever she needed a significant bookmark for her career, this is it. Not only does it mark her entry into Bollywood but also makes her known for the awesome role she needed to portray: a chirpy, bubbly girl with all the world at her feet.

Amir Khan had to be play two characters - and he delivers. Pavi was complaining that the romance wasn't as special as the Tamil version; I too felt his love scenes with Asin were not expressive enough - it could be a deliberate play to have a dumb look on your face when talking to a girl because you are insanely rich and have never known love, or Amir didn't do much acting.

He does compensate, though, in his memory-loss role. The anger, bewilderment after the '15 minute' period and action scenes are simply amazing. Amir's gym-body provides the perfect excuse to beat all villans of every size to pulp and gather strength after substantial blood loss and immense pain.

While Surya played a psycho-like character, Amir is closer to the Memento guy than Surya. Though Ghajini is no Memento(Memento, with the non-linearity removed, is still rich in storyline because the loss in memory is not 'announced', like in Ghajini - I will say the alarm clock was not for Ghajini but for the audience to be reminded this guy has a rare medical condition) only the present-day-story is taken from that movie. A perfect example is towards the end, where Amir stares at his nemesis not knowing what to do.

Riaz Khan, sorry to say, still is the aberration he was in the Tamil version as well - a role limited for him to tell everyone he too has a muscular build and can run faster than the wind. But where did Amir disappear from that bus? The villain, by the way, seemed more at home having to speak a language he had a command over....

The flashback scenes are excellent and serve the purpose of taking us away into a parallel universe, one of fun and ironies. I'm sure the screenplay is slower for the Hindi version - the flashback scenes did go along much slower than they did in the Tamil version - I guess it could be to lengthen the film or to match the length of the 'present-day' part.

Boy, can Asin speak Hindi. I was very apprehensive about her foray into Hindi films, partly because she is not as thin as she used to be (ref: Telugu M K s/o M) and her unknown spoken Hindi. Well, now on it will be delightful to watch her future projects, given her successful debut.

Rahman's music didn't seem to be very special, but I sense it has a lot of North Indian traits (especially Guzarish) which will make it a hit with that crowd. Also, listening to the songs alone have no effect: they suit hand in glove with the moment in the film. Kaise Mujhe especially, where Amir is swept off his feet by Asin's show of compassion when she gives him the money after selling her car - is particularly effective in stirring up emotions. Behka, toward the end with the breathless singing was apt to bring all the Amirs together at once.

I loved Asin's short hairdo in her opening song where she appears on the runway - it is just amazing, though she looks ugly in the black dress and red lipstick - yuck! After seeing a promo of this song I thought the story of the movie was going to be different with Asin being a fashion model rather than an ad film actress.

Jiah Khan recreates Nayan Thara: stupid and irritating at the same time, without the extra pounds and blemishing nose ring, though. Thank God for not including a nose ring!

A few notes...

The guns in Asin's intro song made me uncomfortable, because they were toy Kalashnikovs, that too just one month after the tragedy at Bombay.
When Amir enters his bathroom, it is written 'Remove T shirt', which means he usually sleeps with a T shirt rather than a buttoned shirt.............?
Amir's executive dress with sleeves near his shoulder do not look good. They look different, though.
I wonder how he was allowed to take Rs. 1 lakh thiry-something through the airport - also, I didn't know corporate jets could fly intercontinental.

All in all Ghajini is a winner because it combines a tale of a heart wrenching yet too-good-to-be-true fairy tale and one of dark, action-packed vengeance: all credit the the crew, especially A R Murugadoss. Shahrukh better start doing something useful with his talent, rather than remaking the same old hot air or he risks losing to those with actual skills.

Asin's done even better than the Tamil version(drooooooooool............) Well Ghajini has been special to me plainly because of the flashback and how the hero could not tell his love who he really was... How a girl mistook the actual person for the person she faked her love for.. The ensuing hilarity.... That gullible cute girl..... and now I have two good movies to serve my feelings.

Chelsea Clinton for President!!

Yes, now I am drinking the Kool Aid. Unlike last time, I wish she will stand and win the Presidency. Maybe 2020 or 2024 or 2028 or after, she will have my support(which accomplishes nothing, actually). I had the privilege of watching her garner support for her mother in my University(pics on my Orkut profile and video on YouTube) - she was very calm and answered every question with an air of confidence and readiness. She did bring home Ohio for her mommy, though not the bigger prize, I envision that her passion has the potential to morphed into one that will benefit the country as a whole. Tales abound of how she called up super delegates who switched support to Obama - to enquire first hand. Let it be known: she wanted to canvas for her mother, and was in fact shielded from such activities. Chelsea Clinton for President! Yee Haw!!

Ok, I will admit it, I am sad Hillary Clinton lost.

Arranged marriage vs Love marriage

Given that I am still a student with other priorities and my friends who discussed this issue are like me(I am implying none of us are in wedlock yet), this post may seem naive, but nonetheless, I wish to put down my thoughts and share the talking points put forward by my fellow bloggers.

By our(Indian) definition a Love marriage is one where the decision to get married is taken by the girl and boy themselves, mostly without their parent's initial consent, through an initial period of courtship. An Arranged marriage is one where the parents seek a partner, done through social networks and finalised through horoscopes.

The basic difference and the bone of contention between the two is that in the latter case the girl and boy have little say in the decision; they leave the majority of the decision making to the parents and the inner family circle. Those in favour of Love marriages contend such a decision is unfavourable as the two hardly know each other and it doesn't make sense to get into a long term relationship with someone you barely know.

Most say an Arranged marriage is unthinkable of: you've never met this person before, and suddenly life has to be led with this new individual.

While many say adjusting with such a person will be a mountain climb, I would like to point out: why is it that many Love marriages end in disaster? The farthest depth they sink to is a divorce. I do not have any statistics, but they are not untrue either. Of all the marriages to my knowledge(I have been a poor socialite with regard to who is who), Arranged marriages breaking up are as few as successful Love marriages. Why?

Or, conversely, if, an Arranged marriage is unfavourable because you squirm at accommodating a new person, why doesn't that sense of adapting take over to avoid the Love marriage from breaking up? In other words, what you fear might happen in Arranged marriages actually happens in Love marriages: irreconcialiation.

Maybe, in doomed Love marriages, people expect too much from the other. Maybe love wasn't the only factor. Or the person was no longer the same.

In India, social, monetary and caste issues complicate the issue beyond compare where we are expected by the society to honour borders surrounding castes and religion. It could be that we tend to absorb problems more, hence Arranged marriages are more successful.

But personal choices aren't what cause the most concern. We are a close knit community - we know even our neighbours, visit relatives regularly and keep our immediate family closer to our heart than anything else. Any decision they take, and more importantly, the ones we take, affect all.

Individually they may accept 'a new generational shift' toward Love marriages, but parents will definitely have trouble keeping their calm when their children have married a person unaccustomed to the general traditions. That person may not be used to the practices; they may not be willing to absorb them; oh, and I need not mention vegetarian and non-vegetarian choices. Within family circles, surely, parents will feel sad at things not going 'well'.

But does that mean we do as we like with no regard to the general society? I remember my Biology teacher boldly suggesting that we marry someone from New Zealand to have children with good genes - so what does his statement mean for those who don't like that idea? My latest flurry of thoughts were set ablaze by two blog posts - one from Prashant Sree and Priyadarshini (who I only know is a junior and a Nittian).

Prashant Sree's is one where an inter-religion love couple decide against getting married because of the shock it would cause to their families. I do not know for sure if it is a true story, as it has a favourably happy ending(atleast to me)where they realise their love is better off as friendship. Though the protagonist in the post does not say how exactly he agrees with his father, he could be referring to the social rammifications. The advice given by the father is exactly what I have had in my mind all along. If it had not been for that blog post, I would have written all that here, so I suggest you read that blog post.

Our parents have been with us all the time - we are greatly indebted to them - in this sense would it be right to leave them in the dark with a decision we make all by ourselves? Would it be right to scorn at their disdain for a Love marriage, and put them in deep pain? If you ask me, no.
Then again, does that mean we have to be subject to their picks?

This is where the second mentioned blog post comes in. Priya's fictional(I guess) story is about a girl who wants the freedom to take a wider role in deciding who she wants to marry. She shows her utter disregard for custom by rejecting her parent's picks for her.

I tried to push a point across that old fashioned matchmaking like the father did were more successful, to which Priya gave a powerful rebuttal:

"I agree old fashioned marriages have sustained over time but how sure are you that the couples are really happy and lead a meaningful life?"

This set me thinking - yes, it is true that in trying to do as our parents say we may swallow our pride and forgo some liberties - so where should the line be drawn? How can we be happy in our decision as well as make sure our parents are not dispirited by our 'absurd' decisions?

Some observation will show that all such decisions - hated by either the girl/boy or parents - are revealed at a make-or-break moment, just before the engagement or when they are not ready to change their mind in any way: there is little time left for any sort of reproach.

My best hope, in search of an answer, is that whatever the decision, it must be an open forum - no hidden meetings, no soft phone calls, no behind-the-scene sessions - all persons concerned should be kept informed from the very beginning - and any opinion should be vocal and discussed.

On the one hand this means a 'love' relationship may be forced to be nixed at the bud itself and an arranged marriage proposal may not progress very far. On the other hand, 'love' relationship may blossom, with a chance being presented to impress the critics and the 'arranged' proposal has a potential for one to be won over by the sheer charisma of the other.

In the mix of all of this Blany, who is very hard to convince, scrambled things further: he said it was a time for a paradigm shift and to buck the boring trend and take things into our own hands and convince whoever needs to be: it is a measure of how mature you are and how much faith your family has in you. He went so far as saying that an in arranged marriage people 'pretend' to be happy and Indian society is divided because of old ground rules.

But then I guess noone will be unhappy if you love a person your parents would have probably chosen for an Arranged marriage - some person whose background they are already OK with. That is a possibility.

So in this murky realm, my kind suggestion would be not to hurt the feelings of those you have known for 20 odd years for the sake of someone you know for 20 weeks. I personally don't think it is a chance worth taking. I'm not saying a nod to everything is the right resolution; I am sure they will understand if you express your concerns.

Any relationship needs a healthy dose of trust, understanding, and true love.

Some interesting recollections come to my mind: my Hindi teacher from school advising that love is dangerous with boys abandoning girls(or vice versa) as easily as changing shirts, notwithstanding an analogy(which is not entirely water-tight) pressed upon us, that while selecting a sari or a shirt at a shop you will go through several, yet in a Love marriage just an impulse starts things off.

/I wonder how deep a hole I am digging for myself.

President Bush's unfortunate legacy

President Bush, nearing the end of a tumultuous reign, was stitching together a fine fabric of legacy, as to how we will know him 50 years from today. All that has come crashing down with one piece of footage which will be the calling card for all things Bush 43, not to mention the other videos flying around the internets and the intertubes rubber stamping his implied 'unintelligent' image.

The shoe throwing incident is highly unfortunate and should not have happened; it was not entirely pre-planned either: an article said that the journos were waiting for 4 hours and were expecting a press conference with only al Maliki... and then President Bush turned up and this enraged reporter showed his contempt for Bush by throwing his shoes at him.

I am particularly concerned, though a bit over the top, that the Secret Service were not the first to react - again, they were far away from the guy and everyone had been thoroughly frisked.

I feel very sad that future generations will begin their analysis of Bush with the shoe throwing, I sympathise with him.

Drawing positives from the clip: Bush reacted very quickly, al Maliki hardly flinched and tried to block the second throw; I appreciate Bush's composure after the incident, staying put.

Bobby Jindal for President

No I am not drinking the Kool Aid, but if he does want to run, Jindal should do so not in 2012 but in 2016, in part because I am assuming that Obama will do a job good enough to be re-elected in 2012(Jindal vs Obama will be an interesting but lopsided fight because one has experience as Governor and the other as President). But 8 years is an eternity in politics, and someone else might emerge as a hot choice for the GOP, so some might advise Jindal to run in 2012 while the 'Obama fever' ensures his own rise within the Republican party.

Jindal doesn't seem too intent on 2012 himself yet has been dropping hints all over the political spectrum; on the other hand, I question rather controversially if America will be ready to elect another non-white to the highest office in quick succession. Having said that, Jindal is from the South and Southeners would be the first to raise such issues, so this could be a non-issue.

This article in Newsweek(2 pages) is a good writeup about things as they stand today, including details about his conversion, the 'minority' issue, the infamous 'exorcism' and his political touring.

A very very interesting implication from the article is that Jindal, having high ambitions, wanted to become a complete American - converting to Christianity, believing in core conservatism, changing his name, wearing western clothes - so the next time someone calls Jindal of Indian origin, that may be all that connects him to India from his point of view.

Overall, Jindal is getting a lot of favourable gossip from all around - for now - who look up to him as a future scion to the conservative brand.

Further reading: Newsweek: Page 1 Page 2

Efficiency of an electric heater

I'm wondering if we have to even bother about the efficiency of an electric heater? This is such a wonderful trick question to ask someone....

Beginning of the end for Firefox?

The revolution only has just started, but I get a feeling that Firefox, the open source, much loved browser is going to be all but dead. And the guys to blame, ironically, are it's benefactors.

Google's much raved Chrome is coming out of beta, and doesn't have any 'bad' features apart from a few privacy clauses here and there, which shouldn't bother the majority of users. So there is nothing to 'hate' it so much, moreover it too is built on the same engine as Firefox, open source.

Mozilla gets majority of its revenue through an agreement with Google, which is the default search engine for Firefox. There have been various reports that Google is pushing to include Chrome as the default browsers through the OEMs, i.e. when the machine is built itself. Once Chrome gets a decent start and some share of the pie, it makes sense for Google to cut all ties with Mozilla - and eliminate a competitor. Given that, Yahoo(if it continues to survive) or some other company may be willing to support Mozilla, but is highly unlikely.

The problem with Firefox is that research has shown that people use Firefox not because they love Firefox, but because it works so well, hence they will have no regret into using any other good browser.... like Chrome.

Firefox has spread mostly through word of mouth and some pushing by Google through it's Google pack and also through Adsense(?) by including Google toolbar with it. Of late Chrome's download links have been placed on YouTube and in Orkut - an effort to make people use it.

Most people use IE because it is already included with Windows - so as mentioned above, if Chrome is the default browser, they may not switch to anything else - of course, I'm assuming Chrome will be as well maintained as other Google products, making them comfortable with Chrome.

So what will kill Firefox? One - the funding - all Google has to do is end the agreement and bulk of Mozilla's revenues are gone. Two - marketing - Google will encourage users to download Chrome by offering Adsense users to make a cut of the profit. Three - make Chrome the 'best of the browsers' - Chrome could eventually incorporate features to accept all addons compatible with Firefox - that will be the final straw. Once Chrome is similar to Firefox and Mozilla is left with no money, Firefox will be doomed.

And so what was once a four-way battle between IE, Firefox, Opera and Safari will have a new entrant with enormous firepower and warchest. Sure will be interesting.

I really don't see an avenue where Firefox can make a solid footing. Google is not stupid to keep a competitor in the running when it is calling the shots......

Reading glossy magazines

Am I the only guy who has to tilt a magazine from the normal reading angle to avoid the 'shine' off the glossy paper..... Special lights and upward facing shades will work, still...

Madras Bombay Calcutta Bangalore

I still refer to these cities as they were and knew them as. There's a difference though.

The respective governments changed their names to 'give them their original' names. It has more to do politically than anything else, it sure is questionable as they should be known as Chennapattanam and Kolikata(or Kalikata) and Bendakaluru.

I do not feel outraged by the change in name; changing Tanjore to Thanjavur and Mysore to Mysuru makes more sense, but since the previous cities were 'named' by the very people who made them what they are today, from mere villages to major power centres, it's not a crime to retain those names.

Anyway, officially these are to be called Chennai and Mumbai and Kolkata and Bengaluru, but I will still refer to these by their old names. In private that is. Publicly they should be known by their official names; but otherwise I prefer to call them by their old names.

In family and private circles calling a friend by his nickname is common practice; that is why Madras will always be Madras and Bangalore Bangalore.

At the same time, each time CNN or BBC refer to Madras or Bombay or Calcutta, it angers me, because sometimes they do not even mention that the name has changed. It does feel odd for them to mention Bengaluru, but still, that is what it should be called because it's nameplate says so. Sigh. The mentioned media outlets are perennial defaulters, however I think it will be a while before Bangalore will change even in the national media.

On a similar note, I remember my multi-lingual maternal grandmother(English, Tamil, Kannada, some Hindi and Telugu) writing letters for an inopportunistic person - who gave the addressee to be residing in 'Madras Presidency'. This happened about 10 years back. Even today, at my place, daily labourers who are refugees from Sri Lanka are referred to be from Ceylon for all purposes.
Maybe it's just that old habits die hard.

Degree must for MPs and MLAs

I saw a photo on another Nittian blog with this caption(paraphrasing): "US senators from Yale, Indian MPs from Jail".
In my honest assessment, all the bills and rules and decisions in the government are not made by the MPs or ministers but by the Secretaries: the Indian Administrative Service or Civil Service members. Election manifestoes are in the hand of politicians; the actual bills are undoubtedly done by the mentioned persons.
I say this because in the past few months in the US Senators have been working 24x7 on the economic crisis - hammering out details - arguing, bickering, inserting, removing clauses, but most importantly: they do it themselves. Almost every single Senator or Representative is a Law graduate with some experience in actual courts - so Judicial jargon is no big deal for them.

Bribery and incompetence and apathy are the biggest evils in our society, but, the only immediate, enforceable, first, basic solution I think is to bring a rule so that only college graduates can stand to be MPs/MLAs.

Atleast then lawmakers should spend more time making better laws for the nation rather than discussing politics most of the time, hopefully, with the college atmosphere bringing some change to their way of thought.

Again, does my proposal stand up straight against the recent violence in the Madras Law college? Eh...... Nation should be put ahead of self, people.

Pakistan: What next

Are we afraid of Pakistan?
Are we scared out of our skin that Pakistan will invade North India, bomb Bombay, nuke Delhi and we won't do anything?
Are we frightened that our neighbour will suddenly occupy all of Kashmir and Jammu and we'll lose our head?
Do they think they are not at all involved in the militancy taking place on our land?
Do the US, UK, China, Japan, Germany, all of them think we should not take any action but cry and crib and do nothing else?

My ulterior, ideal motives for Pak are one which are controversial and date to a time when Mohammad Ali Jinnah was still 'uncorrupted'(a post on that coming soon), but still, when a classmate throws chalk on you all day from the next bench do you just complain to the teacher(who ignores you) every time or should you walk up and give a tight slap on the face? As of this post, our leaders are pledging, to talk this out, which is a very patient thing to do, and Pakistan knows that.

Pakistan is coming to crossroads on the pages of history. A widower of a great leader is head of state; the military has a new commander; the intelligence agency is still thriving and notorious; an unstable government teeters on edge; skirmishes on the western front are bothering; a foreign power conducts strikes without permission(US); the country is being forced to act against the very idealogy it once embraced.

Afghanistan is a peculiar problem. Fanatics, who find favour with tribes in the North West(Pashtuns), are traditionally welcomed in Pakistan. But with the US involvement and identification of certain groups as being terrorists, a crackdown ensued but it did not have the intended effect: they have survived underground because they are supported by the public who are more than willing.

The President Elect of the US, Barack Obama has made very clear - if Pakistan does not act on militants on its soil, the US will not hesitate to carry out the attacks. This means if the US informs Pakistan of a focal point for whoever it is searching for and Pakistan does not want to strike - for whatever reason, be it religious or sympathy or whatever - the US will do so.

All intelligence point to Pakistan as being the last refuges of the extremists - so if the US does act without permission, it will be in an interesting spot: it is on the one hand acting like a bully but still protecting its interests. Afghanistan is to get an influx of soldiers from Iraq, so an escalation of tensions is forthcoming.

Frankly Pakistan was created as an Islamic state: so to act against extremists or 'terrorists' on its soil, willingly, will be playing with fire - none too obvious than the storming of the Red Mosque. And I speculate that it is the Army which is in real control on affairs, including the ISI, which shouldn't be too surprising, given the history, so whatever the political government orders are likely to fall on deaf ears. So, overall, can an Islamic country act against Islamic terrorists aginst public goodwill without falling into anarchy, or sufficiently control its affairs?

The most recent bravado attacks on Bombay were an attempt to disrupt goings on - which happened for only one day. These terrorists arrived by boat; definitely they came from Pakistan, US intelligence along with Indian intelligence saying they have proof that Lashkar-e-Taiba did it will help from the ISI - but my question is - why? Why would the ISI help a terrorist organisation in attacking India? Maybe the LeT got training from the ISI long before they had plans to attack Bombay or the ISI changed plans. Or maybe the ISI wants to support groups so that Kashmir still burns.

Obama, in my opinion, has a hazy policy on Kashmir: he said in an interview, 'we should solve the Kashmir problem so that Pakistan can focus more on Afghanistan'. The problem is that though there is no direct link they are similar in thought: support of extremism. 'Solving' the Kashmir problem will take more than a stroke of hand, and even if it is, that does not stop across the border attacks or support to home-grown zealots.

My point is this: Pakistan is being pushed into a tight corner. In the name of 'War on Terror' and a new President in the US who no longer believes in dictatorship(pun intended) Pakistan has to crackdown on all form of extremism nestled within its borders. If Afghanistan is swabbed clean, all the dirt will be in Pakistan, which is where the problem lies. How will the top brass respond? How will the people of Pakistan respond?

Many diplomats are touting Iran, Pakistan and India to be the US' major foreign policy headaches in the coming year. How things sort out, and how Pakistan evolves, is to be seen. I only hope the intellectual crowd in Pakistan be more involved and peace be upon all of us. Enough with the extremism.