Claims of Victory

Wars that don't end in the total destruction and surrender of one side ....

"Mission accomplished" US President Bush 2003

   ... can often produce strange definitions of victory.

So for instance, during this first "cease fire" in the Iran, Hezbollah, USA, and Isreal war (the cease fire that Isreal and Iran have sort of ignored, and only the desperate USA believes in), Hezbollah in Lebanon, has said that they are on the "threshold of a major historic victory" .... this despite the fact that Lebanon itself has been severely damaged, and Hezbollah is being given a severe beating.

More than 1.2 million people in Lebanon have been displaced - one in five of the population and the vast majority of these have been from the Shia Muslim communities in the south, the eastern Bekaa Valley and the southern suburbs of Beirut, areas where Hezbollah holds control (not the Lebanese government).

While in Iran, despite its military being significantly degraded, along with both military and civil infrastructure being destroyed, its still claimed that "its Victory in the field would also be consolidated." However as its Islamic fundamentalist regime is still in power, despite many of its top leaders having been killed in bombing strikes, it could be described as a victory of sorts.

Meanwhile the USA, in the form of President Donald Trump has declared "Victory" in this unauthorised war more times than you can point a pointy stick at. They have also claimed this as a "historic battlefield victory." This despite the fact that Iran still controls the Straits of Hormuz, and has near weapons grade Nuclear material, and is still firing drones and missiles. 

So it appears that you pays your money and takes your choice, as to what defines a victory. For some, its simply surviving, while for others its anything you can sell to the electorate as "victory."