It's not so black & white. There is a spectrum of people from extremists to moderates.
Yes, there are wide spectrum of people based on character. Some people are highly fanatical while some or midway while some are selfish and so on. That does not mean they are not threats. The moderates are just people with weak minds, who are indecisive and just go with the crowd. But they are still threats as if there are friends group of 10 people in which 1 is fanatical, the rest 9 being moderates will simply follow their leader and do anything.
Again, as I said, it's not so black & white.
I highly recommend you visit Kashmir and interact with different communities/people, preferably off-beat, not just in tourist areas. From your opinion above I presume you don't have a ground-level understanding of the Kashmiri diaspora.
There are different types of people in every society. The only question that matters is - during times of crisis or war, which side will they take. Everything else is irrelevant. I am pretty sure that you are wrong. The reason behind your wrong thinking could be:
1) You are too superficial and only look at the surface. You have done some small talks and just made conclusions that people are good
2) You are one of them doing Taqiya or someone with an agenda
3) You are a coward who can't take tough decisions or handle stress and hence just choose to believe the most convenient theories to soothe your mind and just try to use confirmation bias with superficial events.
It is a general global trend that economic prosperity weans one off from religion. Although I agree Muslims have shown tremendous outlier examples of this trend, they are not impervious to its effects.
Push people off religion? Can you explain which religion other than Catholicism/Protestantism has been affected by prosperity? Yes, there is significant reduction in crimes which are generally economically motivated activities. People tend to take lesser risks for money & resources when they have easy access to them. But there is no real correlation with irreligiosity.
I will give counter examples:
- Russia & majority of Slavic orthodox christians were damn poor, lost the WW1 by signing armistice with Germany in 1917 and were facing huge political crisis. They gave up religion and became communist in a mass rebellion. There was no link with economic prosperity that drove them off religion. If anything, it is the poverty that made people angry against religion. In Latin America too, it was racism by Whites that led to surge of communism, not increased economic prosperity.
- China & majority of East Asia never had any religion but some local beliefs like Taoism, Confucianism etc which are civilisational values. So, their distance from religion has nothing to do with economic prosperity
- Hinduism is seeing huge surge of poojas, yagnas, temple visits as people are getting rich. But Hindus were never fanatical in religion even 200 years back and that has had no relation with economy.
- Countries like Iran, Saudi, Qatar etc have strict Islamic codes, spread Islam across the world by using their oil wealth. This shows increased religiosity with wealth.
Can you show me any reasonable correlation with prosperity & irreligiosity other than in Western countries? If you are only looking at western countries, then you are simply ignoring the rest of the world. The west is not the world. This has been said recently by Jaishankar & Lavrov too in case you did not get an idea on your own.