in the third century B.C. Hannibal Barca, son of Hamilcar Barca, driven by hatred of Rome and devotion to his father, launched the 2nd Punic with Rome and made world and military history by traversing the alps with 45,000 men (including elephants) to invade Italy. After several initial battles on the Italian peninsula Hannibal faced at least 85,000 Romans(some historians believe it could have been more) at the battle of Cannae. Hannibal defeated them with a smaller force using advanced military tactics. For the next 9 years Hannibal would terrorize Italy, it's allies, and threaten Rome itself.Despite the thousands of Roman battle deaths, the republic gathered its strength and realized that they had to stand firm in the face of terrorism or become its slave. General Publius Cornelius Scipio(Africanus Major) decided that the best way to rid Italy of Hannibal was to attack his home turf in Spain and in Carthage. After hearing news that Spain was now under Roman control and Carthage was under attack Hannibal finally retreated from Italy back 'home' to Carthage and never set foot on Italian soil again.Most modern historians show respect for Hannibal and military leaders have referenced his tactics for ages. But at the time the Romans despised him and did not have full rest until they burnt Carthage to the ground. To the people of Rome, one of the most civilized people on earth, Hannibal was a terrorist and the phrase "Hannibal is at the Gates" would strike fear into anyone's heart who remembered such a terrifying invader of their homeland.
Fast forward to 9/11 2001. Osama Bin Laden, driven by hatred of America and devotion to jihadist islam launched an improbable yet highly successful attack against the United States, the psychological effect which is still being felt 7 years later. Like Hannibals invasion and his victory at Cannae, Bin Ladens attack was a strategic surprise in a new kind of warfare and created an emotional scar that caused fear and anger for revenge among many Americans. Although Bush may not be remembered in quite the same way as general Scipion he was the one who encouraged America to stay the course and not give in. And also to advance the idea that in order to rid oneself of a terrorist you have eliminate his power base and pursue him wherever he should flee. Although Hannibal is revered as a great general he was cast out of his homeland and spent the rest of his life on the run until he was driven to suicide in order to avoid Roman assassination. And like wise although Bin Laden is revered by many in the middle east his fate will follow that of history and despite damaging america in the end Bin Laden will only have made us a stronger nation, better prepared for an uncertain future.I think many comparisons can be made to the response of the people of Rome and the response of America after 9/11 and by consequence between Hannibal and Bin Laden. And although Hannibals death toll was far higher than Bin Ladens and Hannibals tactics are studied today and revered to some degree like Rommel, I think Bin Laden will be despised forever by all civilized countries because he represents barbarism and the destruction of civilization as opposed to a legitimate alternative (though not the best) such as what Carthage may have offered. And the comparison raises another question as to the definition of terrorism and civilization. Ultimately it involves the morality of the attackers and their goals. The 9/11 hijackers were terrorists. Bin Laden is a terrorist. Hannibal terrorized but for some reason he doesn't fit the definition completely. Maybe because his fighting methods were legitimate warfare although tactically ahead of the romans. Or that he recognized the Roman authorities and government and sought surrender terms from them. Its a difficult line to draw but i think it can be drawn if clearly thought through.
