Iran thinks it won the war and we can't stop laughing

In the wake of the recent Israel-Iran war, which culminated in a U.S.-brokered ceasefire on June 23, 2025, some voices in Tehran have proclaimed a narrative of triumph. Iranian state media and officials have cast their retaliatory strikes as a strategic success, claiming resilience against U.S. and Israeli aggression. Yet, a closer examination of the conflict’s outcomes reveals a starkly different reality: Iran did not win this war. Its military and nuclear capabilities have been significantly degraded, its strategic position weakened, and its domestic stability further strained.

The Conflict in Context

The war, which erupted earlier in June 2025, marked a dramatic escalation in the long-standing Israel-Iran rivalry. Israel initiated hostilities with a surprise bombardment targeting Iran’s military and nuclear infrastructure, prompting Tehran to respond with missile and drone strikes. The United States entered the fray on June 22, striking three key Iranian nuclear sites, Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan, in what President Donald Trump described as a “spectacular military success.” The war, lasting roughly 12 days, saw significant casualties and damage, particularly in Iran, before a ceasefire was announced.

Iran’s narrative of victory hinges on its ability to withstand the combined might of Israel and the U.S., absorb the blows, and launch retaliatory strikes, including a missile attack on the U.S.’s Al Udeid base in Qatar. Tehran’s leadership has emphasized its defiance, with figures like Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi asserting Iran’s right to self-defense and warning of further responses if provoked. State media has celebrated the evacuation of nuclear sites as a foresight that minimized damage, while hardliners like Hossein Shariatmadari have called for aggressive measures like closing the Strait of Hormuz.

The Reality of Iran’s Losses

Despite Tehran’s bravado, the conflict’s toll on Iran was severe. Israeli and U.S. strikes targeted critical military and nuclear infrastructure, significantly setting back Iran’s ambitions. According to Israeli assessments, Iran’s nuclear program was delayed by at least two years due to the destruction of key facilities. While Iranian officials, like Hassan Abedini, claimed the targeted sites were evacuated and no “major blow” was suffered, the absence of radiation leaks, confirmed by Saudi Arabia and the UN’s nuclear watchdog, does not negate the physical and strategic damage. The Fordow facility, a heavily fortified uranium enrichment site, was among those hit, undermining Iran’s ability to pursue advanced nuclear activities in the near term.

Iran’s military capacity also took a beating. Posts on X and analyst reports suggest that Iran’s air defenses were decimated, with command centers and key generals eliminated. The Revolutionary Guards reported losses, including five members in Khorramabad, and Israel claimed the killing of a senior commander, Izadi, linked to Hamas funding. Iran’s retaliatory strikes, while symbolically significant, were largely ineffective. Its missile barrage on Israel wounded only 10 people, and strikes on Al Udeid caused no casualties or significant damage, partly because Iran warned Qatar in advance, allowing U.S. forces to prepare. This pre-notification, while framed as a diplomatic courtesy, underscores Iran’s reluctance to escalate directly against the U.S., revealing a strategic restraint born of vulnerability.

Casualties and civilian impact further highlight Iran’s losses. Iranian state media reported at least 430 deaths, with some sources, like the U.S.-based Human Rights Activists News Agency, estimating up to 639 fatalities. Thousands were injured, and strikes on civilian infrastructure, including hospitals and residential areas, exacerbated the humanitarian toll. In contrast, Israel reported 24 deaths, a fraction of Iran’s losses, underscoring the asymmetry in damage.

Strategic and Political Fallout

Iran’s claim of victory is further undermined by its weakened strategic position. The conflict exposed the limitations of Iran’s deterrence, as its much-vaunted missile arsenal failed to inflict meaningful damage. Analysts argue that Tehran squandered decades of strategic capital, undermining its regional influence. The destruction of nuclear facilities has reduced Iran’s leverage in future negotiations, despite President Masoud Pezeshkian’s insistence that its civilian nuclear program will continue “under any circumstances.” European efforts to coax Tehran back to the negotiating table have been rebuffed during the conflict, but Iran’s weakened position may force it to reconsider.

Domestically, the regime faces mounting pressure. Social media posts from young Iranians reflect anxiety and anger, with some fleeing the capital amid fears of further strikes. The regime’s restrictions on independent journalism have stifled dissent, but whispers of closing the Strait of Hormuz, a move that would cripple Iran’s own economy, suggest desperation rather than confidence. Protests in Tehran, while state-orchestrated, hint at underlying unrest, especially as economic strains from the conflict and ongoing sanctions intensify.

The Ceasefire and Beyond

The ceasefire, announced by Trump and agreed to by both Israel and Iran, was framed as a mutual de-escalation. Yet, Israel’s evacuation warnings for Tehran neighborhoods like Mehran and District 6, issued just before the ceasefire, signaled its operational dominance, as it continued strikes until the final hours. Iran’s agreement to the ceasefire, described by some as a response to Trump’s “begging-like” urging, suggests Tehran recognized its precarious position after the Al Udeid strike.

While Iran’s leadership may spin the ceasefire as a victory, the reality is that it halted hostilities from a position of weakness. The regime’s survival is not a triumph when its nuclear ambitions are crippled, its military degraded, and its people battered. Israel, despite facing international criticism, achieved operational successes, while the U.S. demonstrated its ability to decisively intervene.

While Tehran may have avoided total collapse, survival is not synonymous with success. As the dust settles, Iran faces a long road to recovery, with its strategic ambitions curtailed and its rhetoric of defiance sounding increasingly hollow. The war may be over, but for Iran, the real challenge, rebuilding from a position of profound loss, has only begun.