If individual violence can be moral, then government violence can also be moral.

The morality of individual violence is subjective. It's rare when two parties involved in a fight will both agree that it's moral. It's more likely that one party thinks it's moral, and the other does not think it's moral.

This can extended to governments and societies. For example, during war, religious leaders will typically bless the bombs or guns of their country-persons. This reframes the violence as a moral act.

The country being attacked may do the same thing, or they may point out the evil inherent in what the religious leaders are doing, and frame it as an immoral act.

The violent act can be simultaneously moral and immoral, depending on ones perspective.

There are also pacifists who think all violence is immoral. They even question the legitimacy of self defense.

There may even be people who think any violence is moral. While I can't think of anyone who thinks aggressively attacking people is a good thing, plenty of people will align with a government or warlord based on the idea that "might makes right". Some so-called libertarians seem to think this way.