That point is clear enough. The issue is about the nature of the point.
islam exalts the point, altho islam is actually mohammed-worship, the point of which is to be gloriously obedient, even tho obedience is submission to exquisite cruelty. Exquisite cruelty (the worship of allah and his associate mohammed) is the necessary option of islam.
As the story of Abraham also shows, it is the necessary option of what our President believes.
I don't know the man (W) personally, so I am speculating.
But based on what he has said and not said, it seems W cannot find the intellectual basis for confronting those whose religion leads them to seek our total destruction.
My biggest problem with Dubya, and this may be a related point, is that he's too queasy to do what's necessary to win this war.
Churchill was a far more morally complicated figure than Dubya, but it took a Churchill to carpetbomb German cities and win WWII. Dubya has spent too much of the last four years looking out for Iraqi civilians, in my view, when he should have been trying to win the war.
So perhaps it does take an amoral SOB to properly wage war from time to time. And in that sense, an evangelical like Bush, who has it in the back of his mind that he'll have to answer to God for every dead Iraqi, etc, may not be the best guy for the job. You sort of need an anti-hero at times like this. Not sure if that's what you're getting at.