“I don’t care if you call it World War III, World War IV or whatever. It’s scary.”

That was how one of my students described the current wave of terrorism, which began about a generation ago and really cranked up after the Cold War’s end. President Bush repeatedly referred to the conflict in his recent State of the Union address, drawing special attention to the hundreds of thousands of U.S. soldiers deployed worldwide to counter the challenge.

Naysayers, who are predisposed toward disregarding what the president asserts on most any topic, believe that he exaggerates the danger. They see other motives in his keeping the nation fearful, on guard and distracted by global terrorism, such as a free hand for Bush to pursue his broader political agenda.

The critics have a point, but Americans should not allow such perceptions to keep them from viewing the terrorist threat with clear eyes. Simply put, the president has not overstated the zeal, reach, power and relentlessness of al-Qaida and other terrorist organizations. Americans who doubt the prevalence and malevolent intentions of those groups do so at their own peril — and at the risk of psychological trauma, should ignorance leave them as unprepared for future terrorist attacks as they were on 9-11.

Instead, Americans had better steady themselves for the long haul in this struggle. The war against terrorism will continue through post-Bush presidencies, both Republican and Democrat, for decades to come.

Indeed, the age-old problem of terrorism, which has afflicted humankind for thousands of years, will never fully disappear. The best that civil society can hope for is to battle active terrorists and erect potent defenses, while aggressively identifying and dealing with the political, economic, religious and other roots of this insidious political violence.

Some analysts have suggested that the labeling of the conflict as a war causes confusion, largely because the term suggests conventional players, familiar rules of engagement, activities of limited duration and clear indications of winners and losers. Moreover, they ask, how can terrorists, who commonly cluster into small cells to carry out their attacks, wage war against a world of 6 billion people?

Granted, it’s easier to see World War I or World War II as global struggles because they blend neatly into popular notions about a “world war.” Even the Cold War, which reverberated internationally and deserves the world-war label, had mostly conventional elements. But the Cold War also ranged into unconventional ground, with irregular forces in many battles and no foreseeable timetable.

The current struggle against terrorism fits more into the Cold War mold and ranks as no less of a world war. Indeed, I have called it World War IV for years, while acknowledging the early work of analysts who used similar terminology a decade ago.

Today’s terrorist organizations have unprecedented reach through their effective use of technology, communications and other tools in a globalizing era; their presence in dozens of countries; and their relatively new strategy to pull together a coalition of terrorist groups and networks to thwart the war on terror.

In addition, al-Qaida, the largest and most fearsome terrorist network — despite its facade of distorted Islam — runs on transnational, ideological fuel, similar to Nazism and Communism. It seeks to tear down not only governments in countries with Islamic majorities that invoke its ire but allied nations and international organizations.

But World War IV extends well beyond the conflict with militant Islam. There are numerous other groups donning spiritual hats — supposedly inspired by Christianity, Judaism and various religious cults — that deliver death and destruction. Collectively, those terrorist organizations have adherents numbering in the hundreds of thousands and sympathizers who could add up to millions.

Even in a world of 6 billion, several hundred thousand committed extremists can cause great harm. The sooner Americans come to grips with that reality and accept its open-ended burden, the better.

John C. Bersia is an editorial writer for the Orlando Sentinel and the special assistant to the president for global perspectives. His e-mail address is jbersia@orlandosentinel.com.