Obtain a copy of 'Positional Ideas In Chess' by John Love. It helped me a bunch.
Why is it so difficult to think positionally?

you cant understand positional chess independent of the art of planning. for this try kotov's play like a grandmaster or stean's simple chess. hell even modern ideas in chess by richard reti is amazing.

I am rated FIDE 1900 and don't have a clue about positional play. So, why would you bother?
Try to play ultra sharp games, use 1.e4 e5 exclusively, and try to analyze your games without use of the engine.
As for books you need something which covers chess fundamentals - from openings, middlegame to endgame. Don't study openings. And play, play play...
Best of luck

Why? because you guys only play speed chess you don't have the patience and the discipline for the slow and very,very careful build up of the position plan like Reshevesky and Karpov all you do is bang pieces like crazy in 1 or 2 seconds every single move like brutes even in 75 minute games it doesnt work that way.

Why? because you guys only play speed chess you don't have the patience and the discipline for the slow and very,very careful build up of the position plan like Reshevesky and Karpov all you do is bang pieces like crazy in 1 or 2 seconds every single move like brutes even in 75 minute games it doesnt work that way.
What are you talking about? He's played almost exclusively correspondence games.

Does everyone have the same problem as I do? I try to evaluate the position on the board, so that I can make good positional moves, but I seem to miss all the strengths and weaknesses that I'm supposed to be able to see. Am I doomed forever to be strictly a tactical player?
Not sure what you mean by supposed to see. What books have you read / games have you analyzed? First you need a basis for understanding, then you can try to find these ideas in other people's games. When you're wrong, that's great, read the annotations / analyze some more. That's how you learn.
After that you can try to find these ideas in your own games.
i have the same problem dillydream. i think they are so hard to find because you have to see them in the context of the grand sheme of things.
you also need a lot of experience

What are you talking about? He's played almost exclusively correspondence games.
Correspondence games does not imply long thinking.

What are you talking about? He's played almost exclusively correspondence games.
Correspondence games does not imply long thinking.
It's not speed chess.
you cant understand positional chess independent of the art of planning. for this try kotov's play like a grandmaster or stean's simple chess.
Or if you'd like to learn physics, try "Daddy, Why Did I Fall Down?" or "Advanced Topics in Quantum Field Theory."

What are you talking about? He's played almost exclusively correspondence games.
Correspondence games does not imply long thinking.
It's not speed chess.
Some people move like it is speedchess.
And to you OP, you are rated 1223. You need to impove a lot more to understand and apply positional play.

What are you talking about? He's played almost exclusively correspondence games.
Correspondence games does not imply long thinking.
It's not speed chess.
Some people move like it is speedchess.
Are you going to argue that live standard is lightning because some people play it at that speed? It has multiples of days as move limits, it's not speed chess.
Telling someone they don't have patience and play moves every 1 or 2 seconds when almost all their games are online ones is ridiculous.
What are you talking about? He's played almost exclusively correspondence games.
Correspondence games does not imply long thinking.
It's not speed chess.
Some people move like it is speedchess.
Are you going to argue that live standard is lightning because some people play it at that speed? It has multiples of days as move limits, it's not speed chess.
Telling someone they don't have patience and play moves every 1 or 2 seconds when almost all their games are online ones is ridiculous.
He's suggesting that some people will not use long time controls for long thought processes. You're implying that he's suggesting that NOBODY uses long time controls for long thought processes.

Are you going to argue that live standard is lightning because some people play it at that speed? It has multiples of days as move limits, it's not speed chess.
It is hard to believe English is your native language. I will state again what I said:
"Correspondence games does not imply long thinking."
If you disagree with this statement, then you are actually saying that anyone who plays correspondence games ALWAYS thinks long, regardless who and how good/bad he is. Don't try to defend it, it makes you look ridiculous.
Then I rephrased my implication in more simple words:
"Some people move like it is speedchess."
Same argument as above.
Telling someone they don't have patience and play moves every 1 or 2 seconds when almost all their games are online ones is ridiculous.
And when did I say that? Some other guy mentioned impatience, not me.

You think it's me that doesn't understand the language when you can't use the word imply properly? As a clue, imply =/= guarantee.
As for your sentence, I don't know what the point of any of your posts is.
I'm saying it's a bad assumption (completely baseless) to say that someone plays speed chess and spends one or two seconds on each move when they have almost only played online (correspondence) games.

I'm saying it's a bad assumption (completely baseless) to say that someone plays speed chess and spends one or two seconds on each move when they have almost only played online (correspondence) games.
And it is also a bad assumption to think that someone who plays online chess exclusively always thinks carefully.
Yes, if he was rated 2500+ then it would be an plausible assumption, but not for a 1223.
Does everyone have the same problem as I do? I try to evaluate the position on the board, so that I can make good positional moves, but I seem to miss all the strengths and weaknesses that I'm supposed to be able to see. Am I doomed forever to be strictly a tactical player?