I already pointed out: If Iran cannot control the Houthis then the US should not ask them to.
'
I have already pointed' out that supporting the Houthis are in line with Iran's core interests. Asking them to cease support for the Houthis is like asking the U.S. to cease support for certain countries.
As I also pointed out already, Iran would have a choice: either accept being bombed (and then retaliate) or, stop shipment to Houthis.
'As I also pointed out already 'it's not as simplistic as you'd like it to be. Like any country Iran takes certain risks; it would not liked to be hit but is willing to be hit if it's unavoidable. For Iran; whether it's support for Hezbollah or for Assad or the Houthis; it's well in line with national interests. From an Iranian perspective not supporting certain groups would be detrimental to its interests.
I don't think the Houthis are so strategically important to Iran, especially after Iran becoming more friendly with Saudi Arabia. Why do you think Iran would risk a major war with US/Israel, just to ensure they could still smuggle a few more missiles to the Houthis?
If you'd care to look at a map and take into account Iran's neighbourhood; as well as other factors you'd realise the Houthis are very important to Iran in the larger scheme of things. As far as Iran is concerned it's not risking a war with US/Israel because it's convinced that things will not reach that stage. Now it could be wrong but so far it hasn't.
This conversation has been focused on hitting the Houthis; why can't Iran stop supporting the Houthis; the damage a strike can do to Iran; etc, etc but the pertinent question I've asked has not been answered. Assuming the U.S. is willing to hit Iran; what happens if the strikes do not produce the intended political and military results? The West gets caught in yet another war in the region? Also, if a war breaks out who really benefits from it?
especially after Iran becoming more friendly with Saudi Arabia.
Thing's have not reached the extent where Iran is willing to ditch the Houthis. Relations with Saudi have not reached that level and maintaining ties with the Houthis gives Iran some leverage; just like Saudi ties with the U.S. gives it leverage against Iran.
The starting point is getting the Houthis to cease their actions, with the assumptions that Iran has a strong degree of influence (debatable) but at least practically (as a source of munitions).
First we have to ask why the Houthis are doing what they do. Granted the Houthis will have a few reasons; despite using Gaza as a pretext but the fact remains that the current situation in the Red Sea is linked to events taking place in a small strip of land where mass murder is occuring on a daily basis.
I always felt they were rational actors.
Their enemies would like to portray the image that Iran's rulers are driven solely or mainly by religion and are incapable of doing anything rationale.
If we take a non fevered and objective look however Iran has survived despite having very powerful enemies who've done all the can to isolate and weaken Iran. With justification we can also say they've also tried to destroy Iran. It survived the Iraqi invasion which was supported by the West and the Sunni Gulf states; regained it's influence in Iraq [courtesy of the U.S. invasion]; maintained its presence in Lebanon [despite facing great opposition from Israel and others]; kept Assad - the only Arab ally Iran had/has - in power [despite all the backing anti Assad groups received]; defeated efforts by the Saudi led coalition to gain victory in Yemen etc, etc. So yes they're very rational and calculating actors despite all the rhetoric they come up with.
