Quote Originally Posted by Uboat509 View Post
Also I was reading one of Kissinger's books and he talked about how the concept of holding the state to the same moral standards as the individual is a relatively new one. At what point does the state's obligation to protect it's people outweigh moral considerations? The state must of needs do things that the individual would find unpleasant or even abhorent. How do we find and define the line that the state must not cross, even to defend its citizens?

SFC W
Good Topic

I would find my personal inclination in this to be that

When and if it becomes more about the security of the state then about the security of the people the line has probably been crossed.

Well intended powers for well intended leaders without taking into account future leadership possibilities can generally lead to this.

It would be a good study