I have a number of responses to this post; I'll outline of few of them:

Quite simply, it’s the point of all terrorism (and all war, for that matter): they’re framing the conversation, creating a perception which becomes reality, winning the war before entering the battlefield. It’s theatre. The point is to demoralize;

This, I think, is obvious to most LW readers (it is the only way to win against an enemy with millions of times your firepower, after all). And I do wish the US would realize that a bit more and fight back by e.g. building more large, exposed skyscrapers and not cowering behind ineffective, psychological security measures.

to expose the West as hypocritical and cowardly

On the other hand, part of being a non-savage (to use your word) is realizing when notions of honor or integrity become silly. It's up to us to define what hypocrisy and cowardice mean, after all, and not allow our opponents to do it for us.

We train our minds, not to save ourselves, but to save the world.

This is what it comes down to. What makes you think that throwing yourself on the sword for your integrity will benefit the world more than a lifetime's worth of dedicated effort? That's some narcissism right there, I think. I mean yes, if (you're pretty sure that) you can stop nuclear armageddon or save a busful of children then go right ahead and die. But something like

So what should an Atheist - more than just a nihilist - do when the terrorist has a gun to his head? This one would tell them to pull the trigger.

Really? You're confident the vague psychological impact of your resistance (should the story ever even come out) is worth more than you could accomplish with the rest of your life?

A single choice, a rationalization born out of cowardice, can undermine all that we are, and all that we stand for

Statements like this just smack of religion: "A single sin, a single moment of weakness can damn you to hell for eternity." We're human, we suffer from akrasia, we have multiple conflicting desires. Perhaps this site is working towards eliminating those things (though I hope not), but this absolutism still seems unnecessary.

I also refer you to my comment on Eliezer's post Prices or Bindings (and Eliezer's reply to it).