There’s a military historian who’s blog posts show up on this site occasionally (because he does fun nerdy stuff like analyze videogames and fantasy novels). I

There’s a military historian who’s blog posts show up on this site occasionally (because he does fun nerdy stuff like analyze videogames and fantasy novels). I always thought his note on strategy vs tactics was great: > We should start by returning to our three levels of military analysis: tactics, operations and strategy. We’ve dealt with tactics (how you fight) and operations (where you fight, and how you get there). Strategy is an often misunderstood term: most ‘strategy’ games (especially real-time strategy) are actually focused almost entirely on tactics and operations; as a rule, if ‘don’t have a war’ isn’t an option, you are not actually doing strategy. Likewise, a lot of basic planning in business is termed ‘strategy’ when it really is tactics; not a question of goals, but of means to achieve those goals. Because strategy is the level of analysis that concerns why we fight – and thus also why we might not fight. Let’s unpack that. https://acoup.blog/2020/06/19/collections-the-battle-of-helms-deep-part-viii-the-mind-of-saruman/ https://acoup.blog/2020/06/19/collections-the-battle-of-helm...