don't see how to put that genie back into the bottle
they are still neo-nazis decades after the fall of hitler... how long do you think those people are going to remain even after isis loses all of its territory?
ISIS propagate an ideology, and like with Hitler, ideologies can be
immortal. Societies will always grapple with extremism, terrorism and individuals and groups that want to cause harm. They just have to find ways to keep the genie in the bottle, well monitored and have the resources to arrest and combat to prevent.
Combatting ISIS is part of the bigger picture, but we still have all the questions around why it is pretty much exclusively males who are susceptible to extremist indoctrination and why they carry out the attacks. The Finland attack is an 18 year old, a "boy" barely turned man. IIRC the Manchester bomber who went in and blew up children was quite young too (22?). Scripture being ridiculously patriarchal and putting men up on pedestals is probably part of it, as is the concept of martyrdom. It's the same in Christianity and Catholicism (excluding martyrdom) but for the most part for years now, we've managed to keep fundamentalist Christians and Catholics to battles of speech/protest. Not violence or widespread acceptance of abuse of women. Both have very bloody pasts/histories though, and outside of Europe, Catholicism especially, if you look to Africa and Asia, is still tied up in some real atrocities. Paedophilia is still a huge issue with Catholicism in the West as well, which if you ask me may as well be a form of
terrorism against youth/children. The tldr being even in the West we still have many issues with religious fundamentalism, it just doesn't tend to be regular terrorist attacks these days (people like to bring up Christian abortion clinic violence, but that was really in the 80s and 90s).
Basically, no matter where you look there are men using religion for terrible indoctrination of thinking/acting. Which is partly why I hate the term Islamophobia. If someone is being racist just call them racist. Islamophobia gives power to the idea you should not criticise, ridicule, satirise or deconstruct religious texts/thinking/ideologies for fear of offending. As I routinely say one of the main reasons most countries in the West do pretty well with human rights and freedoms is because Christianity/Catholicism have gone through years of criticism/ridicule/satire and also the separation of Church and state on top (Religious law isn't going to happen here). If either had been able to kick off Christianophobia or Catholicophobia it might have made things harder for the societies. Neither of those concepts really kicked off, although there was plenty of pushback, we just went right through it and we have what we have now. Fairly liberal societies where religion is a private matter and not something most think they can use to terrorize, attack or oppress. Some of the vocal atheists of the 80s/90s/00s probably collectively doing their part to normalise critical thinking and debate around Christianity/Catholicism (yes, that includes Dawkins/Harris/Hitchens/Dennet even if liberals now hate them all).
Religions are thoughts and ideas, irrespective of people involving faith/spirituality and supernatural elements. Thoughts and ideas need to always be up for critical debate in any healthy society, and shutting that down is how you get some countries in the world where dissent, opinion and challenges end up resulting in jail/condemnation or worse. Hence,
creeping-Islamophobia is not really something I enjoy seeing propagated in liberal societies that have little issue challenging the other Abrahamic religions. Racism is racism, you do not need
special terminology to dress it up. Other societies use concepts of 'outlawed criticism' as I just said to control populations, and that cannot be accepted or supported in any liberal society which wants to try and combat extremism and terrorism. The people maybe can't do what the police and intelligence services can, but the people as a collective have the power of debate, thought and critical thinking. That can go ways to challenge dogmatic beliefs/extremism, just as it's partly responsible for getting us better LGBT and women's rights due to years of debate, critical thinking and science to back it all up (versus Christians/Catholics and the churches all screaming that homosexuality is a sin/block gay marriage).
Check this study in the UK for changing views on LGBT even within religious communities. Not many kept going around saying #notallChristians or stop being Christianophobic. Populations did what they needed to do to challenge dogmatic viewpoints and fight back to normalise how it's healthy for a society to care about LGBT rights. It largely worked, but it's still ongoing work too, especially in America. Populations need to keep doing that each time any religion ends up producing extremist sects or viewpoints that spill into the open. Especially when we're talking about it taking the form of violent attacks and large loss of life. Wahhabism coupled with what some preachers teach about the Koran/Muhammad is causing serious problems around the world and like it or not that does tie back to Islam/Islamic doctrine.