Skip Navigation
Matthew Yglesias

Matthew Yglesias - Matthew Yglesias is a fellow at the Center for American Progress Action Fund.
More

Matthew Yglesias is a fellow at the Center for American Progress. His first book, with the working title Heads in the Sand: Iraq and the Strange Death of Liberal Internationalism, scheduled to be published next spring by John Wiley and co., deals with the Democratic Party's struggle to find a post-9/11 foreign policy, focusing primarily on the rise and (hopefully) fall of the liberal hawk movement.

Previously, he was a staff writer at The American Prospect and an Associate Editor at TPM Media, where he contributed to the group blogs Tapped and TPMCafe. His main blog, now at The Atlantic, has existed in various forms since the dark ages of the blogosphere in January 2002.

His writing has appeared in The Guardian, Slate, The New Republic, and The Washington Monthly, and he is a regular on BloggingHeads.tv and makes the occasional radio or television appearance.

Desperately out of touch with the American mainstream, Yglesias was born and raised in Manhattan and studied philosophy at Harvard where he was editor in chief of The Harvard Independent, a campus alternative weekly.

His latest writings can be found on the Matthew Yglesias blog.

Training

By Matthew Yglesias
May 30 2007, 10:18 AM ET Comment

What Harold Meyerson said:

One of the mysteries of the current discussion of how best to get out of Iraq is that so many otherwise clear-eyed critics of administration policy say we should withdraw our combat troops but leave units behind to train Iraqi forces. As rational policy, it's vastly preferable to leaving combat forces there as well, but it leaves unanswered the question of which Iraqi forces, exactly, we should train. Those of the current Shiite-dominated Nouri al-Maliki government, which has employed Shiite forces to terrorize Sunni areas? What exactly would we train these forces to do? Be more tolerant of the Sunnis? Would that we could, and would that we could train Sunnis to be more tolerant of the Shiites, but these are matters not subject to training.


I think there's a kind of remarkable derangement among the sort of people -- in both parties -- who imagine themselves running the country's foreign policy that makes it impossible for them to ever just admit that situations arise where the United States can't be involved in a useful way. It's vanity, maybe, or just timidity -- perhaps a desire to distance oneself from the damn dirty hippies -- but while this is merely an annoying trait in a opposition party, it's going to be potentially deadly if the Democrats actually find themselves in the White House.

Presented by

More at The Atlantic

Why Israel Might Believe Attacking Iran Is Worthwhile Why Israeli Leaders Might Believe Attacking Iran Is Worth the Effort
Enough With the Obama Teleprompter Jokes Already Enough With the Teleprompter Jokes
Anne Rice, 'Secret World of Arrietty': The Week Ahead in Pop Culture The Week in Pop Culture
The Reverent, Ridiculous Grammys The Reverent, Ridiculous Grammys
The Global Dangers of Syria's Looming Civil War The Dangers of Syria's Looming Civil War

Join the Discussion

After you comment, click Post. If you’re not already logged in you will be asked to log in or register.
blog comments powered by Disqus
Special Report
Election 2012 Reuters Election 2012
The destination for full politics coverage, from the primaries to the White House. Read more ›
View All Correspondents

The Biggest Story in Photos

Athens in Flames

Feb 13, 2012

Subscribe Now

SAVE 59%! 10 issues JUST $2.45 PER COPY

Facebook

Newsletters

Sign up to receive our free newsletters

(sample)

(sample)

(sample)

(sample)