Ukraine Might Parrot Iran’s Boasts To Claim Victory Once The SMO Ends

The same proof that “Non-Russian Pro-Russians” present in support of their claim that Iran dealt a “crushing defeat” to the US could be presented by Ukraine to claim the same about Russia once the special operation ends if its maximalist goals aren’t achieved in full just like the US’ weren’t.

Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova echoed Iranian authorities’ rhetoric by describing the US-Iranian ceasefire as a “crushing defeat” for the US, which most “Non-Russian Pro-Russians” (NRPRs) agree with, who support Iran in large part due to it being the US’ adversary. Although she didn’t elaborate on how she arrived at this conclusion, many NRPRs did, and the gist is that the US failed to achieve its maximalist goals despite its superior force capabilities.

Even though Iran was hit very hard by the US during the Third Gulf War, Iran also hit US bases in the region, the US’ Gulf allies, and Israel pretty hard too. It didn’t sink even a single American ship like many were hyped up to expect would happen, nor did it inflict any damage on the US’ or Israel’s nuclear triad, yet the very fact that it survived and harmed its adversaries is presented as proof of its victory. That’s fair, and everyone has the right to their own view, but NRPRs might soon find themselves in a dilemma.

That’s because the special operation might hypothetically end without Russia achieving its maximalist goals of demilitarizing Ukraine, denazifying it, restoring the country’s constitutional neutrality (including in the practical sense of severing its ties with NATO), and controlling all the disputed territory. Ukraine might then parrot Iran’s boasts to claim victory over Russia for the same reason that Iran is claiming victory over the US, and which Russia endorses, by pointing to the failure to achieve its maximalist goals.

Unlike Iran, Ukraine sunk some Russian ships with US-UK assistance and even attacked its nuclear triad on several occasions, not to mention its failed invasion of Kursk Region that was unprecedented in the post-WWII era. While Iran inflicted much greater economic damage on the Gulf Kingdoms’ refineries, Ukraine still inflicted its own similar but less significant damage on Russia’s refineries. Russian casualties also far outnumber American ones, and its conflict has raged for many times longer than the US’ too.

When taken together, the same proof that NRPRs present in support of their claim that Iran dealt a “crushing defeat” to the US could be presented by Ukraine to claim the same about Russia once the special operation ends if its maximalist goals aren’t achieved in full. That would put them in a dilemma whereby they’d either have to revise their assessment of the Third Gulf War or claim that Ukraine also “crushingly defeated” Russia in order to remain consistent. Peer pressure might also play a role too.

Anyone can still conclude that Russia was “crushingly defeated” if that’s truly what they believe for the same reasons as they claimed that Iran “crushingly defeated” the US, but some NRPRs might be saying that about the US for political reasons. Likewise, Iran’s foes have claimed that Iran was the one that was “crushingly defeated”, but they too might be lying. Unlike the NRPRs, however, they wouldn’t be in a dilemma once the special operation ends since they’d claim the same about Russia for the same reasons.

Folks should always formulate their opinions based on whatever they believe to be the case even if it’s “politically incorrect”, not because they want to make a political point, otherwise they risk contradicting themselves. There’s no single standard when it comes to determining who won or lost a conflict, but those who apply certain standards should cogently explain why they don’t apply in other cases when their application would portray the side that they support as having lost or at least not having won.