The U.S. military has abandoned the expected high-casualty frontal assault and also given up aggressive tactics within the Persian Gulf, instead implementing a comprehensive blockade around Iran.

This is the lowest-cost, most efficient form of "bloodless warfare," considered an upgraded version of the "low-cost maximum pressure" strategy against Venezuela.
The direct military strike costs against Iran are extremely high: during previous four-week operations, U.S. forces spent about $890 million per day, launched 15k precision-guided bombs, exhausted 850 Tomahawk missiles, and depleted 45% of AGM-158 stealth missiles, damaging a large amount of military equipment, with high risks to personnel and resources.
In contrast, a blockade avoids direct confrontation, relying solely on maritime interception and port control to cut off Iran’s economic lifelines.
It also avoids the difficulties of rebuilding infrastructure destroyed by bombing.
Hormuz Island accounts for 90% of Iran’s oil exports, about 1.5 million barrels per day; after the blockade, roughly 1.5% of global oil supply is suddenly cut off.
Abbas Port handles 90% of Iran’s container trade, with an annual throughput of 25 million tons; once locked down, Iran’s foreign trade essentially stalls.
Super-large oil tankers (VLCCs) saw daily rental rates jump from $20k to $400k, with shipping costs soaring eightfold, directly halving Iran’s foreign exchange income.
U.S. sanctions on Iran over five years caused Iran’s oil revenue to lose $232 billion, and its GDP shrank by $642 billion; this tactic has been proven effective.
By using extremely low military costs, it achieves strategic strangulation of Iran.
Therefore, Iran must be alert to this more covert and longer-lasting pressure mode.