Adolf Galland Quotes

I can't tell you the number of times I looked down at what was going on on the ground, or I was engaged in a fight somewhere, and I knew within a couple of minutes how I was going to screw up the enemy. And I knew it because I'd done so much reading.

An excellent weapon and luck had been on my side. To be successful, the best fighter pilot needs both.

I've always been intrigued by fighter pilots and strategy because it occurs in like, milliseconds, you know.

It's unbelievable what one squadron of twelve aircraft did to tip the balance.

The experienced fighting pilot does not take unnecessary risks. His business is to shoot down enemy planes, not to get shot down.

You cannot tell the enemy you're going to leave and expect the enemy to not - and expect to succeed. I mean, that's just a fundamental of warfare.

Our military commanders have said over and over again that a timetable for withdrawal sends the wrong message to our troops, but more importantly to our enemy.

The whole art of war consists of guessing at what is on the other side of the hill.

You know too well the forces which compose their army to dread their superior numbers.

Our military men placed too much weight on spirit and forgot about science.

It's worth two divisions to me.

I don't feel that emotion is a good thing to have in combat. You must be cold.

Most combat is not a hand-to-hand knife battle that the person who can do the most push-ups is going to end up winning.

Having too many layers of approval in a dynamic battlefield environment delays our ability to fight and win, especially when troops are engaged in combat.

Perhaps if you are in support functions waiting on the warfighters to spell out the specifics of what you are to do, you can avoid the consequences of not reading. Those who must adapt to overcoming an independent enemy's will are not allowed that luxury.

Can there be allowed - are we allowed to have any more in the military, General, the element of surprise? You know, I would think it would be a good thing. It's called an ancient strength and we don't use it anymore.

To win by strategy is no less the role of a general than to win by arms.

Oh, I am heartily tired of hearing about what Lee is going to do. Some of you always seem to think he is suddenly going to turn a double somersault, and land in our rear and on both of our flanks at the same time. Go back to your command, and try to think what are we going to do ourselves, instead of what Lee is going to do.

The expert in battle seeks his victory from strategic advantage and does not demand it from his men.

Well we always need brave, capable young men and women who can run a tactical operation and take risks on the battlefield but you should know when we need you to go in there, that if there's any other way to do it, that we could do this without risking your life, we wouldn't ask you to risk your life.

Victory, speedy and complete, awaits the side that employs air power as it should be employed.

In order to assure an adequate national defense, it is necessary - and sufficient - to be in a position in case of war to conquer the command of the air.

We must make this campaign an exceedingly active one. Only thus can a weaker country cope with a stronger; it must make up in activity what it lacks in strength.

A good soldier, whether he leads a platoon or an army, is expected to look backward as well as forward; but he must think only forward.

What makes a Malazan soldier so dangerous? They’re allowed to think.