Spitzer, McChrystal and the dangers of predictions
Looking back at the last 24 hours, I feel good about my prediction that CNN would hire Eliot Spitzer, and not so good about my prediction that Obama would keep General McChrystal.
Oh, wait. I didn't predict that CNN would hire Spitzer, I read that at TVNewser. So I guess that wasn't much of a prediction. Still, it was better than my forecast that Obama would keep McChrystal.
OK, so I will sit on the bench, prediction-wise, for a while. But I will allow myself a couple of comments on Obama's choice of David Petraeus to run Afghanistan, just as he ran Iraq.
First, it is inconceivable to me that Petraeus would accept this assignment without an assurance that he would have the civilian team in Kabul that he thinks he needs. So expect many changes, including perhaps the US ambassador to Afghanistan, who, interestingly enough is a former three-star general--but that doesn't mean that he and Petraeus have to like each other.
Second, expect some slippage on the timeline for withdrawal of US troops. Nobody thinks that counter-insurgency can work on a short time-leash. If Petraeus thinks he needs more time, Obama will give it to him. After all, Obama is not eager to see Afghanistan fall between now and his 2012 re-election campaign.
- Comment (3)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (1)
Comments :
Re: Spitzer, McChrystal and the dangers of predictions
Jim, you're a dear friend. But admit it: when I posted yesterday that McChrystal was out, you thought to yourself, "What an idiot Rob is. So incredibly stupid and fatuous to believe something in the Telegraph. When he turns out to be wrong, I will mock him and tease him and make him cry bitter tears of shame."
Or something like that.
Imagine my relief when it turned out to be true.
Re: Spitzer, McChrystal and the dangers of predictions
The big lesson here, for me, is that we still all really have no idea what decisive events are going to happen. Who could have conceived in advance that Petraeus would take over the war in Afghanistan because McChrystal's staff dished to Rolling Stone -- because of the volcano in Iceland?!?!?
There is no way to know all the things that are going to shape our politics, our world, and our lives. We will always be surprised. That's a pretty intense thing to ponder on a night like tonight.
Re: Spitzer, McChrystal and the dangers of predictions
The smartest thing to do, in the pundit game, is to keep making outlandish predictions. Because everyone forgets about it when you're wrong. And you only have to be right once to command huge speaker's fees for years to come.