Except that the "we won, we were right" part of Trek is what set it apart from other scifi franchises. To kill that is to leave Trek behind and start writing something else. Isn't it?
Seriously? You're saying part of Star Trek is that because someone won a conflict, they must have been in the right? That kind of imperialistic, colonial view is completely the opposite of how I'd view Star Trek.
I mean, note that he said "we won, we must be right". That means "we won, therefore
we were right", not "we won because
we were right" (which would be "we're right, we must end up winning"). He's saying that a lot of Star Trek presents the Federation as in the right because they win their wars
, not because of any actual moral justification. And that Destiny shows the Federation holding to their principles in spite of a totally Pyrrhic victory.
True morality is shown in what you do when you don't
get the dramatic, mostly painless wins. And part of Destiny is to show that, to show that the Federation will stick to its values when things aren't so great, not just when it miraculously triumphs over the Borg when Picard gets them to fall asleep, or when the Enterprise just coincidentally happens to be in a position to slip back in time with them. Or when the Dominion decides to wipe out a rival planet and thus gets that planet's citizens to turn against them.
Basically we're saying that that group on Risa had, buried deep in their extremist and idiotic actions, a good point that's worth taking a look at.