Well we have been trying to "stomp them" since 2001, and there is no correlation at all with our efforts and any reduction in worldwide terrorism. In fact, the years since 9/11 have all been much worse in terms of worldwide terrorism than the years prior:
The graph pretty clearly represents what I have said all along about how Iraq and Afghanistan have been mismanaged by both Bush and Obama. But because of the reengagement triggered by 'surge' operations, they began to decrease...right up until Obama decided to completely abandon all reason and outright left Iraq and let terrorists and terrorism go unchallenged. Then the place blew up.
As for the graphic...it represents other things as well. For example...it shows the world has always experienced terror attacks. It also represents a post war environment where terrorists (some people like to call them 'insurgents') continued to fight on after the wars against Afghanistan and Iraq were ended. Surely you arent shocked by this?
What that graph does NOT show is how many people were killed by the ousted Taliban (those committing the acts of terrorism in Afghanistan and Pakistan) killed during their periods in power. "According to a 55-page report by the United Nations, the Taliban, while trying to consolidate control over northern and western Afghanistan, committed systematic massacres against civilians.[39][40] UN officials stated that there had been "15 massacres" between 1996 and 2001"
But of course...that doesnt count.
In 1998, the United Nations accused the Taliban of denying emergency food by the UN's World Food Programme to 160,000 hungry and starving people "for political and military reasons".[162
But hey...at least it wasnt due to 'terrorist attacks'.
"On August 8, 1998 the Taliban launched an attack on Mazar-i Sharif. Of 1500 defenders only 100 survived the engagement. Once in control the Taliban began to kill people indiscriminately. At first shooting people in the street, they soon began to target Hazaras. Women were raped, and thousands of people were locked in containers and left to suffocate. This ethnic cleansing left an estimated 5,000 to 6,000 dead."
Could have been worse though...they could have been maimed by an IED by insurgents...right?
At this time ten Iranian diplomats and a journalist were killed. Iran assumed the Taliban had murdered them, and mobilized its army, deploying men along the border with Afghanistan. By the middle of September there were 250,000 Iranian personnel stationed on the border. Pakistan mediated and the bodies were returned to Tehran towards the end of the month. The killings of the Diplomats had been carried out by Sipah-e-Sahaba a Pakistani Sunni group with close ties to the ISI.[110][164] They burned orchards, crops and destroyed irrigation systems, and forced more than 100,000 people from their homes with hundreds of men, women and children still unaccounted for.
See...if only we had just left them alone, they would still be in power and we wouldnt have stupid charts presenting stupid agendas to be used trying to prove stupid points.
"The city of Istalif i. e. was home to more than 45,000 people. In Istalif the Taliban gave 24 hours notice to the population to leave, then completely razed the town leaving the people destitute.[43][166]
In 1999 the town of Bamian was taken, hundreds of men, women and children were executed. Houses were razed and some were used for forced labor.[167] There was a further massacre at the town of Yakaolang in January 2001. An estimated 300 people were murdered, along with two delegations of Hazara elders who had tried to intercede.[26]
By 1999, the Taliban had forced hundreds of thousands of people from the Shomali Plains and other regions conducting a policy of scorched earth burning homes, farm land and gardens.[43]"
But people with a myopic ideological bent want to claim we create them.
Like I said...at least they werent blowing up roadside bombs before we went to war with them.