Dead battles, like dead generals, hold the military mind in their dead grip.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
Politicians, like generals, have a tendency to fight the last war.
Sometimes by losing a battle you find a new way to win the war.
Battles are won by slaughter and maneuver. The greater the general, the more he contributes in maneuver, the less he demands in slaughter.
History tells us that a general can move and feed an army as efficiently as he likes, but the real litmus test is the battlefield.
Anyone who has ever looked into the glazed eyes of a soldier dying on the battlefield will think hard before starting a war.
Good generalship is the realisation that you've got to figure out how to accomplish your mission with the minimum loss of human life.
Soldiers generally win battles; generals get credit for them.
Nothing so comforts the military mind as the maxim of a great but dead general.
Our generals talk a good game about taking care of their grunts, and the majority of our Beltway politicians bay with moralistic fervor about how they, too, support the troops.
The American system of civilian control of the military recognizes that soldiers' attention must be fixed on winning battles and staying alive, and that the fog of war can sometimes obscure the rule of law.