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.

Gordon on Iran

By Matthew Yglesias
Oct 27 2007, 9:41 AM ET Comment



Philip Gordon offered some mostly sensible views on Iran in congressional testimony last week, including the key points that "the United States should also take care to avoid unnecessary clashes with Russia and China, which only make them even less willing to work with issues of importance to Washington." Also:

Fifth and finally, the United States should complement its efforts to increase the price Iran pays for lack of compliance with the will of the international community with incentives for Iran to cooperate. So long as Iranians believe the United States is implacably opposed to their country no matter what they do they are unlikely to compromise on the nuclear issue. But if Iranians can be convinced not only that there are high costs of pursing nuclear weapons but also concrete benefits for not doing so, there is a chance that an agreement can be reached.


Right. It's maddening how many people out there seem to think that stopping Iran from building a nuclear bomb is sufficiently important to be worth risking a catastrophic war over, but not important enough to consider worth building a cooperative relationship with the other major powers over, or offering Iran a path to re-normalization of relations with the United States.

Photo by Flickr user Kiapix used under a Creative Commons license

Presented by

More at The Atlantic

The Edwards Trial: A Bad Idea From Before the Start The Edwards Trial: A Massive Waste of Time
The End of Serena Williams The End of Serena Williams
Was Mitt Romney a Good Governor? Was Mitt Romney a Good Governor?
The Pathbreaking Flight of SpaceX's Dragon Capsule, by the Numbers SpaceX Dragon's Pathbreaking Flight, by the Numbers
The Youthful Magic of 'Moonrise Kingdom' The Youthful Magic of 'Moonrise Kingdom'

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
View All Correspondents

The Biggest Story in Photos

Afghanistan: May 2012

Jun 1, 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)

(sample)

(sample)