To many who aren't members of any the three Abrahamic religions (or perhaps are more moderate members?) it looks like this:
Religion can be a beautiful and beneficial thing for many people, but imo it's the fundamentalists who give religion a bad name. Defining an entire religion and it's adherents based on the small minority of it's most fundamental while ignoring the majority who are more moderate and mainstream seems to me a mistake. Judging a Sufi based on the beliefs/actions of a fundamentalist Muslim makes as much sense as judging a member of the Church of Philadelphia based on the beliefs/actions of a member of the Westboro Baptist Church. Any time you have a person or group believing they are the chosen/favored ones and that those who don't believe are doomed/infidels, there're going to be problems.
As far as Muslims, of the few I've known over the course of my life, not a one has ever tried to convert me or threatened me in any way for being an "infidel," whether friend or stranger. Many Christians have tried to convert me, and though none threatened me with violence in the present, many suggested that if I didn't convert that I would spend eternity in a violence filled Hell. To be fair, I've encountered far more Christians of various degrees of fundamentalism in my life than Muslims. I don't judge either religion based on any one adherent I've encountered personally or through the media.
The point about what happened in Germany re: nationalism says to me that this can happen in a Christian nation, a Muslim nation, or a secular nation. Human nature is human nature.
I think much of the current problems have more to do with global economics and geo-politics/militarism than religion, but religion is used as a sort of rallying cry to action because it's easier to create divisions and point out the otherness than it is to take an honest look at why there's so much unrest in the world. Just my subjective opinion. YMMV.