Morality - Murder Organised Random Altogether Legally Insane Testimony Yes?

I was having a discussion the other day about when is it ok to kill another human, at what point is the morality of killing another human measured, I ask this as it seems quite a grey area but so many people think it is black and white and don’t look from all the angles. I will try and make this objective but I want to point out from the outset I am not in favour of killing other humans in fact my moral standing is that all humans have a right to life unless they harm others or direct other people to harm others, and yes that includes all the politicians sending our boys to war to kill other humans.

So in the news over the last few weeks we have seen the Brevik trial and everyone is saying he is insane as he killed 77 innocent people, but he believes he did this to protect his nation, is this not the same for countries who send their soldiers to war, to fight for what they believe. I can hear you say but that is different as they are sent to fight other soldiers, but what about all the innocent people, the innocent children who get killed and are called collateral damage, is this not murder and should the people who sent the soldiers to this war not be held accountable, where is this line between killing for your country and beliefs of the nation and killing for your country and the beliefs of some of the nation, and we all know Brevik is not alone in his beliefs, he was just willing to take extreme action to highlight his beliefs.

So this line, where is it, who is immune from it and why, and as a planet should we allow politicians and country leaders to send our children into war to kill other humans and allow this under the banner of “fighting for our freedom”, no one asked me if I wanted my freedom fought for, nobody advised me of the cost of our freedom, surely there is another way. So back to the line, who decides which is moral and which is immoral, personally as I said earlier I think all killing is immoral but in the news it seems only the individual killers are classed as immoral and insane. But then you hear of the likes of Asaad and Mugabe and Hitler who killed or are killing under a flag of a nation, or an umbrella of belief or religion and these people are called mad men, insane, indiscriminate killers, so what about Bush, Churchill, Blair to name a few, they ordered other people to kill innocent people, but they escape the label of killers, also they escape the law and are quite often looked upon as heroes.

This whole issue has more questions than answers for me and I am able to find people with opinions but when I go head to head and point out the flaws they are unable to present me with suitable answers, so when is it morally okay to kill another human, answers on a postcard please.