So according to the writer, if it’s not a terrorist attack, its.....nothing?
Following the logic of the writer -- such as it is -- one is forced to conclude that, if it's not a "terrorist attack", it must then be an "act of war".
In which case, the United States is fully justified in visiting hell on the perpetrators -- be they in Afghanistan, Iraq, Yemen or wherever.
Somehow, I don't think he thought it through that far...