Actually, it's a huge distinction. Up until the Ayatollah-led takeover, Iran was friendly with Israel. Even now, at it's most howling moonbat anti-Semitism, it continues to keep a specifically Jewish seat in its parliament that's filled with something more than just a capo.
Turkey has, for most its history, including as the Ottoman Empire, been reasonably tolerant. Indeed, while there are religious parties, the government, since the days of Ataturk, has been secular.
I'm not sure what the general attitude is in Afghanistan, but I've known Afghanis in the U.S. who love it here and consider themselves to be Zionists in a political sense, while Muslim in a religious sense.
Of course, there will be a tendency for Muslims world-wide to be more pro-Jihadist than the general population. In the same way any radical group is going to tend to have more sympathy from those who share similar ethnic and/or religious affiliations. But there is a significant difference between Arab Muslims and the rest of the Islamic world.
Although I appreciate your thoughtful insights, I must take exception with the above statement.
Although I accept that those with something in common tend to relate to each other better than those without common beliefs and/or backgrounds, (left to their own devices Shiites and Sunnis will kill each other off, but will unite to kill non-Muslims), I believe Christians as a rule have not historically supported, either overtly or covertly, those who act in violent, hateful ways in the name of their faith. [--And before you ask the standard "Have you ever heard of the Crusades?", I must point out the the Crusades were undertaken as a desperate response to Muslims having overrun the regions considered the birthplace of Christianity, and were a relatively brief portion of the two millenia of Christendom.]
In fact I'd go so far as to say that those who impose their will on others through force in the name of Christianity are MORE susceptible to criticism by Christians. Those who take their faith seriously wish to distance themselves from such heretical behavior MORE than anyone else because to act in such a manner clearly goes against the tenets of the faith.
In Islam, on the other hand, it is part and parcel of the faith, as even most nominal Muslims can not deny--and if they do they are either lying or ignorant of what their faith in fact teaches.
THIS is the reason there is tacit approval among the vast majority of Muslims of jihad. There would NOT be such deafening silence on the part of millions who identify themselves as Christians if similar acts of barbarism were being perpetrated in the name of the one true God.
The nature of the God of the Bible, as contrasted to Allah, clearly does not condone such behavior, let alone reward it-- and despite the fact that most in the world today who identify themselves as Christian are every bit as poorly grounded in their faith as are most Muslims, I am confident that the there would be a far different response from Christians than there is from Muslims to the same actions. The ONLY time anything is heard from most Muslim groups is in condemning some mistreatment of Muslims or "demanding" that President Bush condemn anyone who responds to any of the myriad groups committing murder in the name of Allah.
I can personally assure you that if anyone were doing such things in the name of my faith I would not be "pro-Jihadist".