"Muslims have been in Europe (at least in the current numbers) for decades....
Now, if we were to believe that Islam is a religion based on violent ideology - how come these terrorist attacks have only escalated since the first Gulf War? "
Regarding the first remark, SP, you don't believe this headline then:
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/feb/11/muslim-population-england-wales-nearly-doubles-10-years ?
I'm confused by the logic of your second remark. Are you saying that IF Islam was a violent ideology then we would have had more attacks BEFORE the first Gulf war? What do you think the significance of Desert Storm is? You're too smart to be saying "post hoc ergo propter hoc", so you must think there is a causal relationship between that war and the escalation of violence. Not caused by religion; caused by something we've done? And it follows that if there is violence caused by Muslims in, say, China, the Philippines and East Timor then there must (according to you) be political grounds for it, because there would be no religious justification for it?
To be honest, SP, you are by your own admission totally ignorant of Islam (and, I suggest, Europe's 1400 year fractious relationship with the Islam). I think you deny the violence which is central to Islam either because you are trapped in the multiculturalist delusion, or because you believe that those of us who assert that it is a violent and supremacist ideology are bigots.