In today's modern world, terrorism represents one of the main security issues and as such is the subject of numerous polemics, both at the state and scientific level. In order for states to respond to the threat of terrorism in a timely and successful manner and to protect the sovereignty of their state, they adopt various counter-terrorist strategies and measures. This paper specifically analyzed the states of the USA, France, the United Kingdom, the Netherlands and Spain and their version of the counter-terrorist strategies in which they responded to the existing threat with different methods, considering their historical, sociological and political context. Throughout the paper, the emphasis is placed on the issue of respect for fundamental human rights and civil liberties, which are often sacrificed at the cost of prevention and the war against terrorism, that is, it examines the extent to which each of these countries sacrificed the rights of their citizens and how much this ultimately gave any results. By comparing countries, it can be concluded that the USA had the harshest counter-terrorist military action in Afghanistan and Iraq. In parallel with that, European countries approached the problem somewhat more calmly, but they faced the problem of their own radicalized citizens and a high percentage of the Muslim population perceived as an enemy. What is common in all the analyzed cases is the consequence of the application of counter-terrorist strategies, which is the endangerment of fundamental human rights and civil liberties.