Can you blame me? Your tone has alternated between condescending and insulting (and a combination of the two), after you interrupted my nice little flame-war without warning.
However, the point that you raise is still valid, I suppose, though saying that Geek's argument is more reasonable than mine is more than a little bit silly. As far as the magnitude of the problem, maybe you could clarify it for me? I think it's pretty big, but apparently you think it's bigger?
And yes, I do think that it is possible to negotiate with people for whom "honor killing" makes sense, within certain boundaries. Do we have much choice?
My condescension and insult are an unfortunate by-product of my less than stellar efforts to resist getting bogged down with answering your "spin" on damn near every point that confutes your assertions.
Sorry 'bout that.
For the answer to what other choice we have I think we can look to history. The Soviet Union was able to keep radical islam in check, and that without killing all of them. Mustafa Kamal Ataturk of Turkey also managed to drag his country, kicking and screaming, into the modern era.
How this was accomplished I'd leave as an exercise for the student. Suffice to say, it was NOT through radical egalitarianism, nor gentle persuasion.