Are "Islamic Extremists" Really Muslims?

In order to use our minds, we need to start looking at difficult subjects. Why not start with the subject of suicide bombers? And Islamic extremists?

There are the obvious points, the pros and cons, but let's go directly to what should be obvious, but apparently isn't to many. Suicide bombing is wildly unsuccessful. Islamic extremists are, in a general definition based on usage of the word rather than optimistic hopes for the word, people who believe "defending Islam" or "defending Muslims" means forming militia-type groups to conduct military operations on varying scales and of various types to attack, supposedly, non-Muslims, in order to drive them out of Muslim lands where they engage in political and economic influence-mongering.

Usually they attack civilians. Usually, the muslim/bomber kills him/herself in the process. Usually, there are civilian casualties. Often, the civilian casualties include other Muslims. Often, the only deaths are those of the suicide bombers. In occasional, so-called "spectacular" attacks, the casualties of non-Muslims outnumber the casualties of Muslims or attackers, such as in 9/11. In those cases, these attacks inspire huge wars against Muslim civilian populations and are used to justify condemning Muslims en masse in various countries and situations.

What a success! For non-Muslims. For Muslims, a total disaster in every respect. Leading many to believe the suicide bombers are actually agents of the non-Muslim governments they claim to be attacking. Many Muslims believe that. So why do the suicide bombers continue? No visible reason except to continue the wars that give them, and the governments they attack, fodder on which to justify the arms trade, a burgeoning business.

So, are they really Muslims? Let Allah be the judge. But don't over-confidently second-guess His decision.