Editing Operational level of war (section)

==Background==

During the 18th and early 19th centuries, the synonymous terms '''grand tactics''' (or, less frequently, ''maneuver tactics''<ref>{{cite book |last1=Hess |first1=Earl |title=Civil War Infantry Tactics: Training, Combat, and Small-Unit Effectiveness |date=2015 |publisher=Louisiana State University Press |location=Baton Rouge |isbn=978-0-8071-5937-8 |page=xxi |edition=fourth }}</ref>) was often used to describe the manoeuvres of troops not tactically [[engagement (military)|engaged]], while in the late 19th century to the [[First World War]] and throughout the Second World War, the term '''minor strategy''' was used by some military commentators.<ref>p.218, Jablonsky</ref><ref>p.28, Whitman</ref> Confusion over terminology was exposed in professional military publications, that sought to identify "...slightly different shades of meaning, such as tactics, major tactics, minor tactics, grand strategy, major strategy, and minor strategy".<ref>p.3, Bundel</ref> The term operational art was not widely used in the United States or Britain before 1980–1981,<ref>{{cite book |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=hLBANX5rTIsC&pg=PA21 |title=The German 1918 Offensives: A Case Study in the Operational Level of War |isbn=9781134252251 |last1=Zabecki |first1=David T |date=27 September 2006 |pages=21–22|publisher=Routledge }}</ref><ref>{{cite book |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=QTFLUTXixXEC |publisher=DIANE Publishing |page=v |title=The Operational Level of War |year=1991 |isbn=9781428915749}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=sKGK_t8mYKAC&pg=PA175 |page=175 |title=Strategy and History |isbn=9780887380655 |last1=Luttwak |first1=Edward |year=1985|publisher=Transaction Publishers }}</ref> when it became much discussed and started to enter military doctrines and officer combat training courses.<ref>p. 111, Stone</ref>