Who says it can't be avoided?
For example if the SoH is going to get shut down, I would rather it be initiated by the West to cease Iran's nuclear ambitions, than by Iran to cement their nuclear ambitions (followed by subsequent closings to come).
The Strait of Hormuz will not be shut down. The US Navy will see that it remains open. The problem is that insurance rates on shipping will rise making the cost of oil very high. A greater danger is if the Islamic fundamentalists destroy major oil fields by blowing up pipelines and the oil wells themselves. I toured the burning oil fields in Kuwait on the ground and via helicopter. It was a sight to behold. It took years to get production back up. Thankfully, the Saudis used their excess capacity [above OPEC limits] to mitigate the damage to the global economy. If the Saudi oil fields and facilities in the Eastern Province are destroyed, it would be a catastrophe for the global economy.
I do. The US Navy cannot prevent the straights from being closed. They can only begin a roll back that will take at least 2 months to complete.
The Iranians have a great surplus of ASCMs and mines that can both be deployed from shore. They also have thousands of suicide boats. Ultimately, only holding that shoreline would provide open transit.
But what do you propose. I'm all ears.