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.

World War III

By Matthew Yglesias
Nov 8 2007, 3:05 PM ET Comment

William Arkin catches George W. Bush musing again about World War III: "This is a country that has defied the IAEA -- in other words, didn't disclose all their program -- have said they want to destroy Israel. If you want to see World War III, you know, a way to do that is to attack Israel with a nuclear weapon. And so I said, now is the time to move."

Obviously, as we've had several occasions to note, Bush's efforts to portray his Iran stance as in line with the IAEA are wrong and dishonest. What's more, while it would obviously be a horrible turn of events for Israel to be subject to an Iranian nuclear attack, the response would be an Israeli counterattack and the destruction of Iran -- no World War III. And, more to the point, since the response would be an Israeli counterattack and the destruction of Iran, there's not going to be an Iranian nuclear attack on Israel. The whole thing is ludicrous. But the Bush administration, by repeatedly talking as if the US and its allies have no ability to deter rogue states, is possibly opening the door to some kind of dangerous misunderstandings.

As Condoleezza Rice wrote before going insane "These regimes are living on borrowed time, so there need be no sense of panic about them. Rather, the first line of defense should be a clear and classical statement of deterrence -- if they do acquire WMD, their weapons will be unusable because any attempt to use them will bring national obliteration."

Presented by

More at The Atlantic

Mutts Mobilize in Midtown Against Mitt Mutts Against Mitt
Politics Q&A: Senator Rand Paul Q&A: Senator Rand Paul on His Father
Hooray for Liberty: The Church Has Lost the Contraception Fight The Church's Loss Is Liberty's Gain
10 of the Greatest Kisses in Literature The Greatest Kisses in Literature
Can Full-Metal jousting Become the Next Ultimate Fighting Championship? Can Full-Metal Jousting Become the Next UFC?

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
The Next Global Economies Reuters The Next Global Economies
Lessons from the BRICs — and a look at which developing countries are on the rise. Read more ›
View All Correspondents

The Biggest Story in Photos

Valentine's Day 2012

Feb 14, 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)