Then it becomes a series of hypotheticals.

Sure - no one knows the future.

But the thing about Operation Rolling Thunder is that it didn't work. It failed. Sure - it killed a lot of people and caused a lot of damage. The tactical objectives of the bombing missions were achieved. But it didn't accomplish any of the strategic goals it was intended to deliver.

There's no particular reason to think a renewed, or even a larger, aerial bombing and missile campaign is going to accomplish any strategic objective. Yes, we'll blow up bridges and power plants and other fixed targets. Almost anything we want to destroy, we'll be able to.

But Iran can hold the strait hostage with short range missiles and drones that can be carted around in (and hidden in) something as small as a box truck. And they might not even need to do that - even the risk of Iranian action will keep most tanker companies (and their insurers) from sending any vessels through the strait without Iranian permission. Couple that with their continued ability to launch drones and medium-range missiles at the energy infrastructure elsewhere in the Gulf, and Iran has the ability to make life very unhappy for the global economy. And we can't stop them.

What's the hypothetical where this ends well for us, if the negotiations fail and we're back to war?