Military force is a powerful tool for good or ill, and it can prove instrumental in combating terrorism. The potential effect on terrorist capabilities can be immediate and unqualified, as when a strike kills or otherwise disables a prominent terrorist leader. Military strikes — or the threat of such strikes — can disrupt terrorist operations. The limitations and drawbacks of using the military, however, are numerous. Strikes aimed at terrorists can result in death or injury to innocent bystanders and collateral damage to infrastructure. The victims of this violence will often focus their anger on the attacker, generating support and sympathy for terrorists. Pillar and Preble will discuss these and related issues and show how effective counterterrorism balances the immediate gains of particular policies against the unintended medium- to long-term consequences.
Featuring Holly Bell, Associate Professor (Business), University of Alaska Anchorage; and Hester Peirce, Senior Research Fellow, Mercatus Center; moderated by Louise C. Bennetts, Associate Director, Financial Regulation Studies, Cato Institute.
- Legal Briefs
- Cato Handbook for Policymakers
- Cato Journal
- Cato's Letter
- Cato's Letters
- Cato Papers on Public Policy
- Cato Policy Report
- Cato State Legislative Guide
- Cracking the Books
- Economic Freedom of the States of India
- Economic Freedom of the World
- Public Comments
- Supreme Court Review
In this issue of Regulation, Jonathan H. Adler and Nathaniel Stewart make the case for property-based fishery management, utilizing territorial or catch-share allocation among fishery participants. Also in this issue, Michael L. Wachter explores the relationship between the much-maligned National Labor Relations Act and the decline in union membership.
Timothy Sandefur’s insightful new book documents a vital, forgotten truth: our Constitution was written to secure liberty, not to empower democracy.