Trump once again proved that the cost of launching short-term wars is long-term wars. Those media and institutions who believed that the conflict would end in April were undoubtedly slapped hard. In military confrontation, if the side with overwhelming power (the United States) is eager to fight a short and quick war, On the contrary, it will provide the weakest party (Iran) with the greatest impetus for procrastination. Iran is very clear in its heart that in a head-on confrontation, it has no chance of winning. Therefore, Iran understands that the optimal solution of the weaker side infinitely increases the cost of the opponent's war. Use extremely cheap drones to harass or even paralyze the global energy artery of the Strait of Hormuz, or directly bomb the oil fields of Middle Eastern tycoons. By cutting off energy supply lines, the United States and its allies are dragged into a quagmire of high inflation, forcing them to make voluntary concessions due to economic difficulties. At present, the mainstream view in the market is relatively optimistic, believing that a ceasefire is likely to occur by the end of April, which indirectly underestimates the risk of the war being prolonged. This kind of thing has happened before, and it is not impossible to repeat the 1979 oil crisis. Iran's drone reserves are sufficient to support more than six months, as long as they can withstand systematic strikes from the United States while continuing to damage energy facilities. The global crude oil supply will sharply deteriorate within two to three months, which is the true global black swan.