re: What would end terrorism?
Well, let's focus on the literal meaning of my question. It's not enough to destroy particular organizations, which are momentary manifestations of a terrorist movement. New terrorists come along and form themselves into new organizations. Surviving members of destroyed organizations join other organizations, or form the nucleus of new organizations.
In other words, I'm asking the hard question: How do we solve the problem once and for all?
We have yet to suffer an attack on American soil since 9/11, although there could be no greater coup for the terror groups than to accomplish this. Somebody is doing something right.
That's something to be grateful for, no question. But take the long view: It's only been two years, and the 9/11 attacks were reportedly more than two years in the planning and preparation. Al Qaida certainly can't do it again, but might other organizations be working on it? That's the problem I want to address--it wasn't enough to destroy Al Qaida, we can never feel secure until the terrorist impulse itself is destroyed.
The "sidebar" on airline hijackings was kind of interesting. I'm not sure it's entirely relevant to my question, though. If anything, it talks about a police rather than military response to terrorism, but the circumstances are so radically different that I can't take it as supporting one approach over another.