Dear Bernard:Victory was achieved at Agincourt, Bannockburn and Halidon Hill by provoking the enemy into attacking well defended lines. There are countless examples of defence prevailing over attack; the thin red line at Balaclava, the British infantry squares at Waterloo, the Third Army’s defence at Arras in 1918, turning the tide of that war,or the Eighth Army’s stand at Alam Halfa in 1942 turning the tide of the desert war to name a few. On the other hand attack only seems to work when combined with deception and surprise. Ambush was used effectively by the Picts against the Romans. In “Sword Song” Uhtred’s successful attack on London was achieved through the use of deception, surprise and a dash of luck. A straightout heroic attack on the other hand always seems to end in disaster such as the Charge of the Light Brigade. This seems to suggest that intelligence rather than heroics wins the day. Therefore, do you think that the facts of history contradict the old adage that “attack is the best form of defence”? Regards Charles Russell.