Hey, you should've thought of that before you claimed Islamic terrorism had nothing to do with terrorism. Your main problem is you believe geopolitics is somehow a completely separate factor from religion, and you made that mistake twice just now. The very fact that the majority of terrorism comes from Islam should invite researchers to ask whether it has a mediator/moderator relationship with terrorism and 'geopolitics' and 'conflict'. In some cases it's the inspiration, even absent any 'conflict' or 'poverty' or local geopolitics.
If you can't find a satisfactory result of analysis, should you just rush to say, "well, it looks kind of close enough if I ignore a bunch of other questions, sure!". Or should you admit that your source doesn't really say what you want it to? This is just being epistemically humble.
If you really want to use simple correlations and proportionality, you can turn your own quote on its head and say that the vast majority of countries with terrorism occurred in countries with Islam. Let's break this down for you and you can see for yourself:
This is unsupported. "Driver" requires a predictive analysis of some kind."Conflict remains the primary driver of terrorism in most countries throughout the world.
We could also say that the countries with the highest impact of terrorism are "engaged" in Islam.The ten countries with the highest impact of terrorism are all engaged in at least one conflict.
Huh, I wonder what kind of 'political terror' this is, and the bolded don't have anything to do with carrying out Islamic laws do they? Couldn't be. It's not like those terrorists are trying to push their religion onto others in very specific ways to that religion.These ten countries accounted for 84 per cent of all deaths from terrorism in 2017. When combined with countries with high levels of political terror the number jumps to over 99 per cent. Political terror involves extra-judicial killings, torture and imprisonment without trial.
None of your references work for what you're arguing.