Don’t get us wrong. We don’t mean to imply that tactical excellence (as the United States had in Vietnam) is unimportant. It’s essential, but it should be within the context of a clear overall vision. Vision, then strategy, then tactics.

... the term “strategy” should mean a cohesive response to an important challenge.

Reading the documents referenced, I had to agree. They presented a plethora of broad goals and affirmations of values such as democracy and economic well-being. But there was little guidance as to how to actually deal with the national security situation.

The strategic plan did not lack for texture and detail. Looking within the agricultural equipment group, for example, there is information and discussion about each segment.

Good guiding policies are not goals or visions or images of desirable end states. Rather, they define a method of grappling with the situation and ruling out a vast array of possible actions.