Yes, it looks perfectly clear. A mentally disturbed individual that subscribed to an extreme ideology segment of islam was set to be shipped out to the actual front lines and rather than do that, or flee, decided dto essentially martyr himself.
There's still no evidence of him actually having direct links or planning with a terrorist organization, that he was striving to send some large kind of political message, or inspire fear into the population more so than simply killing people. I still see it at this point as a mass murder perpetrated by a islamic extremist, not a "terrorist" attack. My statement on that would remain the same rather it's Obama or Bush in control. If a clear tie to a terrorist organization in some way is found then I'll be more apt to say this was a planned terrorist attack; as it stands it still seems to be a religiously motivated mass murder.
I don't think many people are going to disagree that it was inspired in part due to radical Islamist views. I think people have issues when they try to say islam, general normal islam, was the sole reason for this.
If this man wasn't adhering to a seemingly extreme version of the ideology, this likely wouldn't have happened. If he didn't have the emotional and mental qualities that lead such a person to gravitate to such an ideology, this likely would've never happened. If we were fighting china or russia rather than predominantly muslim middle eastern countries, this likely wouldn't have happened. I think people trying to pin this almost singularly on Islam in general are absolutely ignorant on this issue and simply trying to score political points. But its absolutely impossible to try and legitimately say that radical extremist islamist views did not play a large part into causing this to occur.