If You Find Your Opponent In A

[the] Aim Is Not So Much To Seek Battle As To Seek A Strategic Situation So Advantageous That If It Does Not Of Itself Produce The Decision, Its Continuation By A Battle Is Sure To Achieve This. In Other Words, Dislocation Is The Aim Of Strategy.

A Complacent Satisfaction With Present Knowledge Is The Chief Bar To The Pursuit Of Knowledge.

It Is Only To Clear From History That States Rarely Keep Faith With Each Other, Save In So Far (and So Long) As Their Promises Seem To Them To Combine With Their Interests.

The Art Of The Indirect Approach Can Only Be Mastered, And Its Full Scope Appreciated, By Study Of And Reflection Upon The Whole History Of War. But We Can At Least Crystallize The Lessons Into Two Simple Maxims- One Negative, The Other Positive. The First Is That, In Face Of The Overwhelming Evidence Of History, No General Is Justified In Launching His Troops To A Direct Attack Upon An Enemy Firmly In Position. The Second, That Instead Of Seeking To Upset The Enemy's Equilibrium By One's Attack, It Must Be Upset Before A Real Attack Is, Or Can Be Successfully Launched

With Growing Experience, All Skillful Commanders Sought To Profit By The Power Of The Defensive, Even When On The Offensive.