Difference between positional and tactical play?

Can anyone explain, please?

Most top rated players employ both positional and tactical, so it's difficult to categorise exactly, however positional play is concerned with careful planning of the pieces to control the centre and guard all important squares, adhering to all the chess principals of development, to seek advantage by position alone can be a powerful way to play. Tactical play is concerned with combinations to win pieces or advantages in position so they are somewhat linked.

Show me a good positional player and I will show you a player who is good at tactics.

Tactics are the vocabulary of chess, but to be fluent at chess, you gotta understand the needs of the position.

Don't worry too much about the differences between tactics and positional chess; focus more on what sort of tactics are needed in different types of positions.

Tactics requires seeing. Strategy requires thinking.

Tactics is what we do when there's something to do. Strategy is what we do when there's nothing to do.

I didn't think up these ideas, of course; I just borrowed them, and I'm not even sure from whom. But I think they sum it up nicely.

Thanks MSteen. That is helpful. May be we should visualise the real war scenarios. Somebody up in the warfront needs the tactics . We also need the planning to win the war, not just the right bullets.

My sincere thanks to SmysloFan and Shippen for the guidance, it is helpful when we realise that Chess is a game of wits and there is a time factor.