Woosh

Sure I should have been more specific when I said oil. Those pipelines will have to be redirected or Iran will just have to leave them be. Blowing them up would result in reciprocal action of blowing up Iranian oil and gas facilities. It goes both ways.

> Iranian here, please give me the names of the 30,000 dead people so we can corroborate your claims with reality.

I can't since I don't have access to the information. But the BBC started doing some reporting [1] back in February about people being killed. Maybe someone you know? The 30,000 number is confirmed by the US and EU.

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c62v248xkl5o

> Next, regarding the United State's ability to "block' the Strait: If the previous blockade was successful, it would have never been lifted.

This is inaccurate for a couple of reasons. First there's the general case which is that the US does indeed want oil to flow from the Strait and is willing to lift the blockade to allow that. Hardliners in the IRGC as deals were being made began attacking ships, and of course the US responded, and thus the Strait was closed by both sides yet again.

Second, the US is currently blockading the Strait now. The fact that it is doing it and doing it successfully is evidence that it can in fact do it and do it successfully.

> I'm not saying Iran hasn't harmed anyone but simply on numbers alone, I would be more concerned about US as an adversary than Iran if I was a sovereign nation.

Well of course. If you're a despotic regime, murdering people, and doing things like that there is only one country on the planet that is inclined to do anything about it. No other country has the will or capability, including Iran (that's not a criticism of Iran it's just a statement of fact). Countries around the world get along peacefully with the US - it's only certain countries that don't and you can tie US actions back to specific actions they continue to take, such as attempting to acquire nuclear weapons which the US, for the good of the world of all things, will not allow.

> I like how you you shift the blame here.

Well who is to blame, and when do we start deciding who is to blame and win? One can argue you start the blame in 2022 when Hamas (funded by and supplied by Iran) attacked Israel. Prior to that I don't recall too much else going on (relatively speaking).

Certainly the US should bear its criticism, but by and large it has been forced into a position in which it must take action. The way you know this is true is this: if Iran stopped trying to build a nuclear bomb, stopped funding terrorist groups (Houthis, Hamas/Palestine, Hezbollah, various groups in Iraq and Syria), and left the Strait of Hormuz alone there's nothing for the US to be upset about. Nobody in America cares about Iran one bit except that your country keeps doing the 3 items I mentioned above and we're simply not going to accept those items, thus, conflict.

> Here is a reminder for you:

Why do we need to only go back to 2018? Why not go back further or pick a different point in time? Better yet, why do we need a JCPOA in the first place? Just don't build nuclear weapons. Why does Iran need this special treatment and monitoring by the ha perfect American intelligence apparatus to ensure that Iran doesn't build a bomb. Just stop trying to build bombs!

> Multiple rounds of strikes by US during the 60 day "negotiation"

Iran also conducted multiple rounds of strikes during the 60 day "negotiation" and unlike Iran, the US actually has a leash on its military and when they say stop shooting they don't shoot, unless shot upon, which Iran of course did start shooting at tankers during this period. Nevermind activities in Iraq...

> Clearly, one side is not interested in peace.

Yes, Iran.

> The problem is that USA does not have any more rights than Iran to declare a blockade.

Ok so both countries are wrong for stopping maritime traffic then.

> If this will continue for too long, other countries may decide that they want to pass through the strait no matter what USA says. Then what will USA do, declare war on everybody? Threaten to use nuclear weapons against those who want to use the strait?

They won't for the same reason they don't do it in the Strait. Nobody is willing to risk their lives. The US has boarded multiple ships - you're aware of that right?

So what exactly is the "world" going to do? If they can't come together and dislodge Iranian "control" of the Strait with what navy are they going to float over and dislodge the United States with? Be realistic.

> For decades, USA has used various blackmailing methods to force other countries to follow its policies, but nowadays most countries seek methods to free themselves from these constraints, so it is unclear if USA will be again successful in the future with such tactics.

Many countries engage in coercion where they can including China, the EU, and others. I don't think most countries are seeking methods to free themselves from any constraints here. Also what blackmail technique are you referring to that America is engaging in re: "future tactics"?

> They certain don’t control the straight, because Iran can attack any ship passing through with ease and the US can’t stop them.

Yes but that also means Iran doesn't control it. The US can attack any vessel passing through with ease and Iran can't stop them.

> Notice how no US navy ships are going through? They know they’ll be sunk. That doesn’t sound like control to me.

Well there's no reason to sail through and expose yourself to fire. Iran doesn't even have a navy anymore.