So my question is this: Their arguments and actions are horrible, tragic, sad, etc. But are they now so routine that they have become in some sense legitimate? That we accept them as part of the nature of war? after all, when more advanced countries fight each other (or weaker countries) and use aircraft to drop bombs or fire missiles, we sort of take it in our stride. War is bad, but when it does happen (and sometimes it happens), this is just how it is. Will we think about Mumbai-style attacks the same way now?
I wonder why we think this will be limited to Africa or jihadists? It seems to me that any radical group watching these events is going to see a very effective vehicle to attack. While we may no longer spool up much emotion or response to these events within the GWOT context, when they happen in Paris, Beijing, or Dallas and are related to other issues this will be seen as the challenge of the next several decades to come.

In general, though, I think it would be more useful to stop calling this terrorism and start recognizing it as a legitimate shift in the warfare of the weaker or dispersed party.