re: National Review: We are worse off than before

quote:

---

In that 50 years, how many times did Iran close the strait?

---

How many terrorist attacks have the funded?

You’re narrowing it to “how many times did they fully close it,” but that’s not the standard of maritime coercion or security risk that exist.

Over the last 47 years Iran has been involved in dozens of direct ship seizures and attacks and well over 100 documented maritime incidents, including harassment, boarding, missile/drone attacks, mining threats, and forced inspections tied to the Strait of Hormuz and surrounding waters.

they have repeatedly threatened closure of the Strait for decades, which is why global naval forces regularly posture there even when it’s not “fully closed.” So the argument isn’t “has it been permanently shut down” it’s that a single state has maintained recurring coercive leverage over one of the world’s most critical chokepoints for 40+ years, and periodically escalates it.

Also being the global leader in terrorism, it’s not a pivot, it’s a fact.

Again, you’re the mayor in jaws, ignoring the problem until swims up and bites you in the arse.

quote:

---

You’re narrowing it to “how many times did they fully close it,” but that’s not the standard of maritime coercion or security risk that exist. Over the last 47 years Iran has been involved in dozens of direct ship seizures and attacks and well over 100 documented maritime incidents, including harassment, boarding, missile/drone attacks, mining threats, and forced inspections tied to the Strait of Hormuz and surrounding waters. they have repeatedly threatened closure of the Strait for decades, which is why global naval forces regularly posture there even when it’s not “fully closed.” So the argument isn’t “has it been permanently shut down” it’s that a single state has maintained recurring coercive leverage over one of the world’s most critical chokepoints for 40+ years, and periodically escalates it.

---

Come on.

SFP knows more than those that have sailed though the Strait in order to keep shipping lanes open.

SFP holds the rank of President General Admiral.

quote:

---

You’re narrowing it to “how many times did they fully close it,” but that’s not the standard of maritime coercion or security risk that exist.

---

There was no real risk until we started this war. That is the point.

quote:

---

they have repeatedly threatened closure of the Strait for decades,

---

And haven't, for obvious reasons.

quote:

---

So the argument isn’t “has it been permanently shut down” it’s that a single state has maintained recurring coercive leverage over one of the world’s most critical chokepoints for 40+ years, and periodically escalates it.

---

And yet, they only closed it when the US/Israel started a war preemptively.

Something literally all of the world knew would happen, except the US, apparently.

quote:

---

With our brash unprovoked war we successfully made Iran closing the strait into an extreme though understandable last ditch lashing out rather than an act of international aggression which would make them an international pariah.

---

Exactly.

Unforced error/self-inflicted wound.

You'll see pivots to "muh 47 years" in response to your post.

quote:

---

Under essentially any other circumstances the world would have isolated them and taken up arms.

---

Correct.

*ETA: Trump going out of his way to alienate, attack, and distance his admin from our allies hasn't helped, either. He created that mess, too, and now he has to live in it.

You’re shifting the argument from pattern of behavior to justification based on trigger events.

Even if you accept your framing that Iran’s actions are reactive, it doesn’t change the underlying reality..over decades and across multiple administrations and regional conditions, Iran has repeatedly used the Strait of Hormuz as a pressure point through seizures, harassment of shipping, and periodic escalation threats.

That’s not a one-off response to a single war, it’s a recurring strategic tool across different time periods, which is exactly why global navies maintain a constant presence there.

And on the claim that this only happens because of recent conflict…that doesn’t explain the 1980s tanker war, or the repeated maritime seizures and harassment incidents in the 2000s and 2010s.

At some point, consistent behavior over decades becomes the baseline reality you have to account for, not something you dismiss as temporary reaction.

You can choose to ignore that pattern, which is effectively what the international community has largely done at different points in time, but that doesn’t make the underlying risk disappear. It just means it persists.

The issue isn’t moral approval or assigning first blame, it’s acknowledging sustained coercive leverage over a global chokepoint and treating it as a long-term security concern rather than an occasional reaction.

quote:

---

And haven't, for obvious reasons.

---

What are the “obvious reasons” you’re referring to specifically?

quote:

---

over decades and across multiple administrations and regional conditions, Iran has repeatedly used the Strait of Hormuz as a pressure point through seizures, harassment of shipping, and periodic escalation threats.

---

OIf that is true, and I don't doubt you, then it makes even more unbelievably frustrating that we are in the position we are in with regard to the Straight. What the frick was the Administration thinking to allow the situation that exists in the Straight? That seems like insane incompetence.

Way too early to call it. US Navy could start escorting ships tomorrow and it would change everything. Iran would attack and dwindle down what is left of their offensive capabilities. USA will produce more oil and gas and that is a job program, at least a stabilizer.

So many factors to play out yet everyone wants to call the game now, all for political reasons.

The writer of that article is exactly the type of beta male liberal that I thought he would be