Terrorism and the Wars Against the Evil
25 September 2026 By Abiodun Giwa
Aftermath of the September 11, 2002, attack.
The United States recently marked and remembered those killed in the September 11, 2001, terror attack on the country. The memorial remains relevant in the country's politics, as former presidents and relevant public officials attended ceremonies at New York Ground Zero, Pennsylvania, and the Pentagon in Washington, marking the 25th anniversary of an unforgettable incident. And victims' relatives still cry, as shown on Friday in New York. President Donald Trump, at the Pentagon event, linked the Iran war to the September 11, 2001, attack, according to news reports.
Some analysts ask if the United States has won the war on terror that began with the war against Iraq. The statement linking the Iran war to the September 11, 2001, terror attack cannot be far-fetched. He implicitly answered whether the U.S. has won the war against terror. The war began in Iraq; another was fought in Afghanistan and other places, including a mini war in Pakistan, where Osama bin Laden was killed, as well as his successor, Zawahiri, in a different place.
Although the U.S. is still engaged in trying to stop Iran from acquiring the nuclear bomb and partly for its sponsorship of terror in the Middle East, it is germane to ask whether the war on terror would ever end, given humans' inclination for vengeance. Rather than expect an end, the civilized world should continue to be ready to defend the homeland against recurrence. It is why Iran's decision to acquire a dirty bomb to deal with Israel and the U.S., and efforts to stop it from acquiring one, will continue to resonate. Another lesson from Iran is the various terror groups it has established in Lebanon and Yemen, aside from Gaza.
The use of an imminent attack, or the lack of one, as a reason some Western countries are critical of the U.S. decision on Iran lacks common sense. First, Iran has never hidden why it is acquiring the bomb, and merely says it is meant for other purposes when it is questioned on the rationale for the acquisition. Terrorist attacks don't give any sign. Was there an imminent sign of an attack prior to September 11, 2001, attack in the U.S.? It is 'we' against them, and 'they' against us, based on enmity established between us past progenitors ever before the modern generation. The so-called terrorism arose from as an act of vengeance.
Terror's nastiness is affecting humanity so much that it tends towards ending humans' migration from one place to another. When we travel, we carry our cultures and religions along. And the common saying 'be like Romans when in Rome' no longer applies. Assimilation taught in 'Sociology of Immigration' has become a mere textbook issue and is no longer practiced. Some countries won't let their culture be affected by outside influence, but they allow their own people to leave their enclave and take their culture elsewhere. Religion that can be practiced quietly has become a loud affair. Christians have been actively converting people all over the world; so too have Muslims, but when traditional religion adherents evangelize, we see them as Satan's children.
The real danger is in the combative attitude of some religion zealots, not necessarily the evangelism. Pitched against what is in the scripture, when some people left to conquer a promised land enabled by God's power, the victory, defeat, and the vengeance cannot be erased. Some observers still link the world's problems to the rivalry among brothers and tribes in the scripture. It is like the Germanic wars during which Beowulf was written alerting the world of the evil of vengeance. It is nasty, ruthlessly dangerous, and can depopulate society. It is war. And now wars are fought towards end it.
When the U.S. was attacked and about 3000 people were killed, would it have made any sense for the country to fold its hands and not go after al-Qaeda for revenge? Would it make any sense to allow Iran to acquire the bomb and end Israel and America before the world embarks on another revenge war? Did I hear you say, 'peace through strength'? Meaning, the civilized world must continue to rebrand to counter terrorists, and never expect a total end to terrorism, as terrorists will always also regenerate to target those who are their enemies.
Terrorism is evil, and so is the war fought to end it. But rather than ending, it festers. Terrorists have supporters, and so are lovers of war. Some condemn wars but have no way of telling terrorists to stop engaging enemies who are more powerful than them.
Some analysts ask if the United States has won the war on terror that began with the war against Iraq. The statement linking the Iran war to the September 11, 2001, terror attack cannot be far-fetched. He implicitly answered whether the U.S. has won the war against terror. The war began in Iraq; another was fought in Afghanistan and other places, including a mini war in Pakistan, where Osama bin Laden was killed, as well as his successor, Zawahiri, in a different place.
Although the U.S. is still engaged in trying to stop Iran from acquiring the nuclear bomb and partly for its sponsorship of terror in the Middle East, it is germane to ask whether the war on terror would ever end, given humans' inclination for vengeance. Rather than expect an end, the civilized world should continue to be ready to defend the homeland against recurrence. It is why Iran's decision to acquire a dirty bomb to deal with Israel and the U.S., and efforts to stop it from acquiring one, will continue to resonate. Another lesson from Iran is the various terror groups it has established in Lebanon and Yemen, aside from Gaza.
The use of an imminent attack, or the lack of one, as a reason some Western countries are critical of the U.S. decision on Iran lacks common sense. First, Iran has never hidden why it is acquiring the bomb, and merely says it is meant for other purposes when it is questioned on the rationale for the acquisition. Terrorist attacks don't give any sign. Was there an imminent sign of an attack prior to September 11, 2001, attack in the U.S.? It is 'we' against them, and 'they' against us, based on enmity established between us past progenitors ever before the modern generation. The so-called terrorism arose from as an act of vengeance.
Terror's nastiness is affecting humanity so much that it tends towards ending humans' migration from one place to another. When we travel, we carry our cultures and religions along. And the common saying 'be like Romans when in Rome' no longer applies. Assimilation taught in 'Sociology of Immigration' has become a mere textbook issue and is no longer practiced. Some countries won't let their culture be affected by outside influence, but they allow their own people to leave their enclave and take their culture elsewhere. Religion that can be practiced quietly has become a loud affair. Christians have been actively converting people all over the world; so too have Muslims, but when traditional religion adherents evangelize, we see them as Satan's children.
The real danger is in the combative attitude of some religion zealots, not necessarily the evangelism. Pitched against what is in the scripture, when some people left to conquer a promised land enabled by God's power, the victory, defeat, and the vengeance cannot be erased. Some observers still link the world's problems to the rivalry among brothers and tribes in the scripture. It is like the Germanic wars during which Beowulf was written alerting the world of the evil of vengeance. It is nasty, ruthlessly dangerous, and can depopulate society. It is war. And now wars are fought towards end it.
When the U.S. was attacked and about 3000 people were killed, would it have made any sense for the country to fold its hands and not go after al-Qaeda for revenge? Would it make any sense to allow Iran to acquire the bomb and end Israel and America before the world embarks on another revenge war? Did I hear you say, 'peace through strength'? Meaning, the civilized world must continue to rebrand to counter terrorists, and never expect a total end to terrorism, as terrorists will always also regenerate to target those who are their enemies.
Terrorism is evil, and so is the war fought to end it. But rather than ending, it festers. Terrorists have supporters, and so are lovers of war. Some condemn wars but have no way of telling terrorists to stop engaging enemies who are more powerful than them.
Comment Form is loading comments...
