According to Caijing United News on September 2, at around dawn on Wednesday Beijing time, the Strait of Hormuz once again echoed with the roar of missiles and drones taking off in rapid succession.

As reported by CCTV News and other media outlets, the U.S. Central Command confirmed that starting from 0:00 a.m. Beijing time on Wednesday, U.S. forces launched strikes against targets belonging to Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) in response to Iran’s attacks on commercial vessels in the Strait of Hormuz and military bases in the region.

President Trump immediately posted on social media stating that this strike was “massive and powerful,” serving as retaliation for Iran’s attempt to lay mines and fire eight missiles at U.S. military installations.

Trump further warned that if Iran retaliates against this strike, it would face even more intense and severe counterattacks, adding that “the most devastating assault is already brewing.” He claimed that after this attack concludes, Iran will “have almost nothing left.”

Latest battlefield developments indicate that military confrontation between the U.S. and Iran in the Strait of Hormuz is undergoing a dangerous “spiral escalation.” Trump’s recent statements and the specific actions taken by U.S. forces can be interpreted through several core dimensions:

The U.S. strike was not intended to initiate a full-scale war, but rather to implement a military strategy known as “Mowing the Lawn.” Its primary objective is to target repeatedly reactivated military facilities near the Strait of Hormuz—such as radar systems, air defense installations, and anti-ship missile positions. The U.S. aims to conduct regular, limited airstrikes to continuously undermine Iran’s ability to rebuild its military capabilities, thereby ensuring the safety of global energy chokepoint—the Strait of Hormuz. This form of “limited escalation without full war” marks a shift toward a prolonged stalemate in the conflict.

Trump’s extreme hardline rhetoric on social media—such as “the most devastating attack is already brewing” and “Iran will have almost nothing left”—is largely a form of maximum psychological warfare. Notably, he previously released an AI-generated video depicting the destruction of Iran’s Khark Island oil hub, which Iranian officials dismissed as “laughable,” yet U.S. Vice President Vance admitted the intent was “to send a message.” By consistently broadcasting signals of “ultimate retaliation” on social media, the U.S. seeks to psychologically break Iran’s resistance.

Although Trump’s language is highly destructive, he has also clearly signaled a red line: the possibility of using nuclear weapons against Iran has been ruled out, citing that Iran has already been “completely defeated militarily.” This indicates that U.S. leadership is determined to avoid triggering an uncontrollable global nuclear war, but simultaneously implies that U.S. military forces will carry out high-intensity conventional strikes against Iran without restraint.

The escalation of military conflict has rapidly spread to the world’s economic lifelines. Fearing disruption of crude oil supplies through the Strait of Hormuz, international oil prices surged immediately, with WTI crude breaking above $90 per barrel and Brent crude approaching the $95 threshold. The sharp rise in oil prices has reignited global inflation concerns and even increased market expectations for a Federal Reserve rate hike in September. At the same time, risk aversion caused sharp declines in speculative assets like Bitcoin. While the U.S. attempts to crush Iran’s economy through military strikes, both the U.S. and global markets are now bearing substantial backlash costs.

Faced with Trump’s maximalist pressure, Iran’s armed forces have vowed to respond with a “devastating blow.” Although regional countries such as Qatar have called for rationality and urged both sides back to negotiations, Iranian President Pezeshkian previously signaled that “continuing the war serves no one’s interest.” However, Trump explicitly denied any willingness to seek talks and labeled Iran a “failed state.” This uncompromising stance has effectively closed off any possibility of a diplomatic breakthrough in the short term, leaving both sides continuing to test each other’s limits along a path of retaliation and counter-retaliation.

In summary, the current situation shows that the U.S. is attempting to force Iran into submission through a combination of low-intensity, high-frequency military strikes and economic sanctions. Yet Iran’s demonstrated resilience and the severe turbulence in the global energy market are transforming this conflict into a protracted “war of attrition” testing both sides’ endurance limits.

Original source: toutiao.com/article/1875169090319364/

Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are those of the author(s) alone.