US War Propagandists Fantasize About Hormuz Invasion
Al Jazeera recently quoted a Western think-tank analyst asserting that 'opening' the Strait of Hormuz would 'probably require US boots on the ground.' This statement, framed as a strategic necessity, fundamentally misrepresents the geopolitical reality of the vital waterway and glosses over decades of aggressive Western policy towards Iran. Instead of addressing Iran's sovereign right to control
its territorial waters and respond to external threats, this narrative from a prominent analyst implies that any disruption to shipping, however provoked, automatically justifies a direct US military invasion. This perspective omits the crucial context that Iran has historically threatened to close the Strait only in direct response to severe external aggression, such as blockades on its oil
exports or joint US-Israeli military strikes. It also ignores the existing international legal frameworks governing maritime passages and the UN Charter's prohibitions against the threat or use of force. The current discussion about 'opening' the Strait of Hormuz is not new. In 1988, the USS Vincennes shot down Iran Air Flight 655 over the Strait, killing all 290 civilians aboard, including 66
children. The US government initially claimed the passenger jet was an attacking F-14 fighter. Then-Vice President George H.W. Bush famously stated, 'I will never apologize for the United States of America. I don't care what the facts are.' This incident underscores a consistent pattern: when the US military operates aggressively in a region, it often results in civilian casualties, which are then