"To make it clear, my stance is that a hard lockdown where everybody follows the rules in the short term would have worked from the beginning and would have been much better for the long term, for EVERYBODY. I can refer to New Zealand, Australia, Japan, Korea as examples. You have no examples because there is as of yet no data where your scenario has played out in a beneficial way."
This cant work as you wont just eradicate the virus like that in a country like the UK, its not a one size fits all New Zealand, Australia, Japan and Korea are not the same as US, Australia doesnt have bad flu seasons, the climates arent the same, same for New zealand, they also arent densely populated, they dont see the same amount of people moving around the country for work as we do, its much the same for Korea and Japan, its not a one size fits all, to relate this to CS, you cant play Nuke like its Dust 2.
"Your stance is that lockdowns cause other issues, which I agree with in terms of soft lockdown, especially with how our government has dealt with it. For example in 2020 we still allowed people to fly in without quarantining. Now we are actually worse for it, not better, because of people complaining about freedoms and the economy."
No hard lockdowns are far worse in terms of their impacts, you are basically just moving death down the line.
"Could you and I reach a mutual agreement that IF we had a proper hard lockdown back in March 2020 with proper measures and essentially militaristic enforcement in preventing people from spreading it, we would be in a much better position now? If we don't agree on this specific point then there is no point arguing further, we wouldn't be able to agree on the fundamentals."
No as you wont eradicate it, as soon as you come out it will just snap right back again.