As President Trump contemplates a return to kinetic warfare with Iran in the coming days and weeks under what has been dubbed “a little Epic Fury,” it is important to take into account one immutable fact about warfare: The enemy gets a vote.

Trump should trust his well-honed business instincts, not the advisors who got him into this war by promising a quick victory. He should recall that, in June, he correctly assessed the first round of Epic Fury: It left him in a military stalemate and had such a negative effect on the economy that he was close to becoming Herbert Hoover and triggering an economic depression in the U.S.

Because of the economic effects of the war, Trump entered into a memorandum of understanding to stop the fighting and get oil flowing again. This was the right call. The most critical issue was then, and remains now, reopening the Strait of Hormuz.

Throughout the initial phase of this conflict, the original Epic Fury, the U.S. expended thousands of munitions against Iranian military sites and inflicted enormous damage on the Iranian economy by striking critical dual-use infrastructure. By some estimates, the bombing damage alone exceeded $100 billion. And yet, despite enormous destruction, decapitation strikes against Iranian leadership and the imposition of a blockade that has lasted more than 100 days, Iran is still standing.

Although the economic situation in Iran is dire, there is very little evidence to suggest that bombing power stations and additional economic and civilian infrastructure will bring about the financial stress, fragmentation and anarchy that eight months of destruction could not.

Since the war began, Iran’s currency has cratered from 1.72 million to 2.7 million to the dollar, representing a 36.3 percent decline in its value. Yet there is little to suggest that Iranian citizens are days away from taking to the streets en masse to overthrow the regime.

In contrast, the American population is overwhelmingly opposed to the Iran War, with Pew Research finding that 65 percent of Americans disapprove of Trump’s handling of the conflict. Rapidly rising energy prices have significantly affected ordinary Americans. With oil trading at $113 per barrel, diesel above $6.00 per gallon and gasoline close to $4.20 per gallon, the economic situation remains serious.

To get us out of this war, Trump needs to focus on reopening the Strait of Hormuz and tune out voices advocating for more of the same failed tactics that got us into this situation in the first place. Another bombing campaign risks triggering a major economic crisis at home, particularly if Iran responds by targeting additional Gulf energy infrastructure. A return to military operations also risks needlessly getting more American troops killed without a discernible military objective.

Despite an enormous bombing campaign that destroyed much of Iran’s Navy, Air Force and original leadership, strikes against vessels attempting to transit the Omani Route reached an all-time high in October. Iran has also reportedly conducted dozens of missile tests this month, including more than 30 reported on Oct. 11, alone, in preparation for a potential resumption of all-out war.

Nothing currently indicates that Iran lacks the capability to retaliate against further U.S. bombing in ways that could devastate the global economy, particularly after global energy reserves have been depleted throughout eight months of war.

Iran has proven that it cannot simply be bombed into submission and that its leaders are unlikely to give Trump a diplomatic end to the war without major concessions. As this conflict has become existential for the Iranian regime, and repeated efforts to reach a negotiated settlement have failed, more restraint-oriented figures in Tehran are being sidelined by those who believe that only catastrophic damage to the global economy can bring about an end to the war.

Given Iran’s demonstrated ability to strike targets not just in Hormuz, but also in the Gulf of Oman and Arabian Gulf, alongside an increasingly fragile global energy market, the premise of a “little Epic Fury” risks producing an Iranian retaliation that delivers precisely the Herbert Hoover economy Trump sought to avoid.

Returning to the memorandum of understanding or simply declaring victory and walking away are two of the most rational options available to Trump. Returning to the memorandum of understanding would align with the Iranian leadership’s repeated demands and revive an agreement Trump has already accepted.

But if he deems this a bridge too far, he can instead declare victory, lift the blockade and withdraw American forces from the region, thereby substantially reducing Iran’s rationale for threatening shipping through the Strait of Hormuz. This would create opportunities for diplomatic progress while allowing both sides to claim victory in the meantime.

The appeal of giving Iran just one more push is understandable. The damage inflicted by the U.S. has been immense. But Trump cannot assume that he can dictate the duration of another kinetic phase of this war.

Joe Kent is a former director of the United States National Counterterrorism Center. Brett Erickson is managing principal of Obsidian Risk Advisors.