No, I think the GP comment is fair. The US is bad at counterinsurgency and occupation, because it's not comfortable with naked imperialism. I read 'on the battlefield' as specifically referring to force-on-force military conflict, which is something different.

The British army defeated the colonial army at every major encounter except for yorktown and lost the war. Hannibal was undefeated except for Zamma and lost the war. Battlefield success and war success are correlated but not determinative.