1 - 6 of 6
Number of results to display per page
Search Results
2. Mini-Nukes and Preemptive Policy: A Dangerous Combination
- Author:
- Charles V. Peña
- Publication Date:
- 11-2003
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- The Cato Institute
- Abstract:
- Currently, the United States relies on conventional bunker-busting bombs—such as the GBU-28, which was used in both Afghanistan and Iraq—to destroy hardened, underground targets. Legislation is pending in Congress that would provide funding for research—but not engineering or development—for low-yield, earth-penetrating nuclear weapons for targets that cannot be destroyed by conventional bunker busters.
- Topic:
- Terrorism, War, and Weapons of Mass Destruction
- Political Geography:
- Afghanistan, United States, and Iraq
3. Bush's National Security Strategy Is a Misnomer
- Author:
- Charles V. Peña
- Publication Date:
- 10-2003
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- The Cato Institute
- Abstract:
- The Constitution of the United States of America makes clear that one of the paramount responsibilities of the federal government is to "provide for the common defense." In the past, the primary threats to the United States and U.S. interests were hostile nation-states. Today, the real threat to America is terrorist groups, specifically the al Qaeda terrorist network. Therefore, al Qaeda, not rogue states, should be the primary focus of U.S. national security strategy.
- Topic:
- Terrorism and War
- Political Geography:
- United States and America
4. The Anti-Terrorism Coalition: Don't Pay an Excessive Price
- Author:
- Charles V. Peña
- Publication Date:
- 12-2001
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- The Cato Institute
- Abstract:
- To prosecute the war on terrorism, President Bush has assembled a diverse coalition of countries for political, diplomatic, and military support. Some of those countries are long-standing friends and allies of the United States. Others have new or changing relationships with the United States. Although there may be a price for their support, America should not pay an excessive price—one that could be detrimental to longer-term U.S. national security interests. And though it may be necessary to provide a certain amount of immediate aid (directly or indirectly) as a quid pro quo for the support of other nations in our war on terrorism, the United States needs to avoid longer-term entanglements, openended commitments, and the potential for an extreme anti-American backlash.
- Topic:
- Security, Religion, and Terrorism
- Political Geography:
- Russia, United States, America, Europe, Middle East, and Asia
5. The Anti-Terrorism Coalition: Don't Pay an Excessive Price
- Author:
- Charles V. Peña
- Publication Date:
- 12-2001
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- The Cato Institute
- Abstract:
- To prosecute the war on terrorism, President Bush has assembled a diverse coalition of countries for political, diplomatic, and military support. Some of those countries are long-standing friends and allies of the United States. Others have new or changing relationships with the United States. Although there may be a price for their support, America should not pay an excessive price—one that could be detrimental to longer-term U.S. national security interests. And though it may be necessary to provide a certain amount of immediate aid (directly or indirectly) as a quid pro quo for the support of other nations in our war on terrorism, the United States needs to avoid longer-term entanglements, open-ended commitments, and the potential for an extreme anti-American backlash.
- Topic:
- Security, Religion, and Terrorism
- Political Geography:
- Russia, United States, America, Europe, Middle East, and Asia
6. From the Sea: National Missile Defense Is Neither Cheap Nor Easy
- Author:
- Charles V. Peña
- Publication Date:
- 06-2000
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- The Cato Institute
- Abstract:
- Sea-based missile defense is being advocated as an alternative to the Clinton administration's limited land-based national missile defense (NMD), which is in the early stages of testing. Proponents of sea-based NMD (which is only a concept, not a program) argue that such a system can be deployed more quickly and will be less expensive than the Clinton administration's land-based system. Some argue that the Navy Theater Wide (NTW) system—which is being designed to provide midcourse intercept capability against slower, shorter-range theater ballistic missiles—can be upgraded to attack longrange intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs) in their boost phase (when under powered flight at the beginning of their trajectories). Interestingly enough, advocates of sea-based NMD include not only traditional supporters of missile defense but also people who were previously opposed to missile defense.
- Topic:
- Security, Defense Policy, Politics, and Terrorism