David Bernstein over at the Volokh Conspiracy, written back in May, unfortunately apropos right now:
I’ve been thinking for some time about blogging about the concept of “enemies”, and how modern universalist liberalism has trouble dealing with the possibility that in some conflicts there is no mutually acceptable solution (at least not from the subjective perspective of the participants in the conflict), and thus one really has a conflict among enemies, not simply a misunderstanding that can be resolved through negotiations and compromises. [[And sometimes, it should be pretty clear to a liberal of any stripe which side has the reasonable position.] To take an extreme example, if an Islamist extremist insists that violence against the West is necessary until Islam dominates Europe and North America, that extremist is an enemy, regardless of what the West does or doesn’t do. The West can either fight or submit.
Details are still emerging yet about what happened in Oslo. The Telegraph is updating as more information becomes available. Authorities haven’t said whether the attacks were terrorism, much less related to Islamic extremism, but it seems clear at this juncture that whoever is responsible for this is a terrorist and an intractable enemy of the free nations of the world.
UPDATE: Norway’s Prime Minister Stolenberg says in a press conference: “I have message to the person who attacked us and the people who are behind it: You’re not going to destroy us. You’re not destroying our democracy and our work for a better world. We’re a small country but a very proud country. No one can bomb us to be quiet. No one can shoot us to be quiet no one can ever scare us from being Norway.”
The Prime Minister also confirmed the suspect arrested is Norwegian.