Quote Originally Posted by Bob's World View Post
First, it is founded in the popular, but baseless "Pied Piper Theory of Insurgency" (My name for it, I'm sure it has a more official name elsewhere), that presumes that some dynamic leader comes along with a magical flute of ideology and that he somehow bewitches (radicalizes) young men to follow him to their doom. Now if we simply expose the Pied Piper as a fraud, they will see the light and settle down and become good citizens once again.

First, this totally absolves the government giving rise to these young insurgents of any responsibility for contributing to the causation for the insurgency through their failures of governance.
We have to do both, push the governments that restrict human rights and opportunity (pick any gov't in the Middle East as a prime example) to change as well as deradicalize the environment. Radical Imams do in fact gather followers by building layers of legitimate-sounding religious discourse on the substrate of resentment against the effects of those governments until the followers believe violence is not only their sole option but their sacred duty.

Many non-violent (I hate the word moderate) Imams simply do not have the education in Islamic jurisprudence to counter radicals in a manner that appeals both intellectually and emotionally to the target population. The radicals have built an intellectually solid, albeit narrowly based, argument that justifies violence against both infidels and innocents, who are tools in that fight. Deradicalization efforts have to tip the radical argument off that narrow base by exposing its nihilism and by promoting alternative, broader interpretations that attract wider support.

Midnight basketball won't do it. We have to both change the underlying conditions and undermine the efforts that capitalize on the resentment. Neither is sufficient by itself.