Unlike many other religions it is built into islam to conquer the world and submit the unbelievers. I think that is key here.

The muslims tried to conquer Europe as early as in the 8th century until the Franks stopped them. To constantly blame Western world atrocities as a cause for muslim aggression is naive and an expression of self-hate.

What should be done?

Try to stay out the Middle East to not aggravate islamists more than necessary. But I think it was right to invade Afghanistan after 9/11 to stop Al-Qaeda and it's certainly right that the US defends and supports Israel.

Stop funding Saudi-Arabia, Egypt and whatnot.

Restrict immigration from islamic countries to the West. Do not let muslims build mosques with tall minarets or call to prayer in Europe, and don't give them special rights that threaten the democratic prinicples of the West.

Try to decrease oil dependancy of OPEC.

Stop stealing their oil, there was no weapons of mass destruction, so we are still there because?

Islamists didn't cause the bombing in Boston, it was 2 Russians. It just shows how sad western society is becoming that we think every terrorist attack is caused by muslims seemingly. I'm not religious, but this annoys me.

But as for radical islamists. America especially just leave them to it the US just make things worse. Saddam Hussein for instance may have been a wicked leader but he was also strong but due to the instability in Iraq now, Radicals now have more power. You could say the same about Iran, it got interfered with in the 70's and ended up with the regime (1979 revolution), the west seem to hate so much now. Let them do what they want. It would save you so much money in military expenditure and surely stop them from attacking us, they probably only hate us because we interfere.

You're not well informed, either, and that annoys me. They were Chechen, not Russian.

Why should they be limited just because they are muslim? Surely that is just fascism. I though freedom of movement was a human right. and also most muslims are good hard working people, why should they be stopped. and why should they be banned from building mosques? It's their culture and religion. Surely some cultural diversity is a good thing. Ignorance of our differences is what leads to hatred.

And finally, what makes you think Muslims are anti-democratic. They are very people that are fighting for democracy. Ever heard of the Arab spring? People in Egypt, Libya, Tunisia, Qatar and Syria and some other countries are fighting for democracy. In think, there is still a civil war going on in Syria, just for democracy and because people had enough of the despot Al Assad. Democracy is not exclusive to the west anymore, i don't think it ever was.  

And guess what? Chechnya is still apart of Russia, unfortunately

And guess what? If you call a Chechen a Russian or a Russian a Chechen, you won't be able to eat solid food anymore.

And guess what else? 99.9% of Chechens are Muslim.

It don't matter i'm not going there anyway. But i guess what you are saying is comparable to calling a Tibetan a Chinese person. It's just so offensive 

First of all, the impression that terrorism is mainly connected to radical islam is completely wrong. Europol statistics for the years 2006-2009 for example show that only about 0,5% of all (successful or attempted) terrorist attacks in Europe during that period were carried out by islamists - the vast majority was carried out by separatists and radical left- and right-wingers. People just have a different impression because terrorist attacks carried out by islamists seem more interesting to the citizens and thus receive much more media coverage, and the media also has a tendency to use the word "terrorism" primarily for attacks carried out by islamists. Remember that there is not even a commonly accepted definition of "terrorism" - in practice, it's usually the governments etc. that decide who is publically being called a "terrorist".

And even those terrorist attacks carried out by islamists are usually not really linked to islamic beliefs. It's obvious that the real motivation for their attacks has nothing to do with what many people believe to be "Jihad" (muslims fighting unbelievers/non-muslims for religious beliefs) by looking at the fact that about 90% of all victims of islamic terrorists are muslims themselves.

So as long as people believe that what drives people into doing such things really has to do with islamic beliefs, their "solutions" will most probably only make things worse because they don't understand the problem in its wholeness.
Instead, you'd have to look at common underlying psychological problems of the individuals who carry out such attacks, and realize that radical islam is just one flavour that these problems can become manifest in. Look what people like Anders Breivik, Timothy McVeigh, the Zarnajews and even the common shooting spree killers have in common. But unfortunately such topics are not publically discussed; we usually don't accept that they were probably pretty average young people and really try to understand what caused them to act in such a horrible way. Instead, we simply demonize them, we are unwilling to accept that given the "right" circumstances, even ourselves might have been able to do something like this. That makes it easier for us but unfortunately doesn't lead to actually understanding the problem and thus being able to solve/reduce it.

If you mean that most people have a very facile and superficial understanding of jihad and extremism in general, then sure. But it's rather nuts to say that it has nothing to do with their beliefs just because they kill far more Muslims than non-Muslims. Of course it has everything to do with their beliefs, and as much as jihadists might hate the infidel they hate Muslims who they see as insufficiently Muslim just as much if not more.

Breivik killed far more Norwegians than he did immigrants, but it would be silly to say his anti-immigration beliefs had nothing to do with why he did what he did. He specifically targeted Norwegians whom he felt were race traitors. You might say, however, that extremism is to a large degree a function of personality type and therefore ideology is somewhat fungible: an extreme leftist or right-wing extremist might easily become an extreme Islamist, for example.