Their asymmetric capability involved a *very* large inventory, built up at great expense over many years. They are rapidly expending most of it as we speak. Hence "wad".

If this drags out, global economic pressures will cause the system to adapt...

New insurance will be facilitated, if shipping companies and crews still don't want to take risks then ships will be sold, crews replaced by military, etc.

Navies can provide escort protection.

GCC countries have tried to walk a fine line, but they really don't like IR at all and if you choke *their* income long enough they'll turn against IR as well.

Trump will quickly feel political pressure at home (lots of rational people in his camp didn't like this one bit from the get-go). If he effs up the global economy and loses both houses this fall, he could get impeached over war powers and removed from office (at that point there would be enough defectors). If he can't control the situation by force, he'll have to do an armistice, and quickly.

Worst case, limit IRGC access to water. Iraq certainly wasn't meddling with the AG or it's neighbor's oil in 1992 or 2004 (yes it's a harder problem with IR).

Again, IR does not have the ability to seriously disrupt the global oil supply long-term. Short-term is different, and the fallout could last mid-term. The fixes in and of themselves are costly and disruptive, especially if it involves actually holding IR territory. Which is why I certainly never advocated for any of this.