If we have to make a choice between attacking their ideology and attacking their absurdity then I agree with you. But whats wrong with doing both? Even if some

If we have to make a choice between attacking their ideology and attacking their absurdity then I agree with you. But whats wrong with doing both? Even if someone is ideologically driven, they might think twice about joining an organization where they are more likely to kill themselves and fellow believers rather than the infidels. Point is, its not one or the other. All approaches can be used in unison to decrease recruitments. Not to mention that its hard to sow terror when you're being laughed at. However, I do agree with your point below. Getting this message out will be difficult because you need to make sure you target terrorists and not Muslims (which, as you say, will create more enemies). Edit: There is also the point in the article about how to use resources to defend the people. If you know the competence level of your enemies, you can defend their likely targets. This doesn't remove the need to protect high profile targets, but we might be able to change the distribution of defense to take into account likely targets.