I guess you are saying that when making a prediction only "pro" points supporting the prediction are to be listed and none of the "cons". And so, Krauthammer need not be "balanced". "On the other hand..." is not required.

Right.

My point is that as a prediction, in the sense of foretelling the future, there may well be an Israeli blitzkrieg.

On the other hand, the justification for such action is terribly one-sided.

I wouldn't say "one-sided" but yes.

If you're predicting the future, you say what you think will happen.

He illustrates what he thinks will happen, and why. Its the whole issue of "context" - putting yourself into the other person's shoes. Look at it from their perspective. (And then you can sometimes figure out HOW to balance the view, HOW to explain to them, etc).

But you cannot do that while "in their shoes". Doesn't work. IF they're not thinking it, attributing it to their thought process is erroneous.

Addison