In a crowded market, I'm pushing someone in front of me aside in order to get my way through. The guy turns around, arguing why I'm pushing him. I reply: (1) If I don't push you, how can I get through? (2) If I didn't push you, how could I get through? (3) If I hadn't pushed you, how could I have got through? (4) If I weren't pushing you, how could I be getting through?
My main problem is: The decision of the push has happened. It can't be changed. It seems that I should use Sentence 3. However, the action of the push is happening and the action of passing through hasn't finished. It seems that using sentence 4 is logical, but it sounds weird, doesn't it? Also, if my intention to reply him is to put this situation in a objective situation, like when we discuss a decision a protagonist makes in a story, does Sentence 1 make sense to show my intention? Is Sentence 2 better to show the same intention? Any advice will be greatly appreciated.