Sorry for bad writing style, its my first time to use stack overflow.

No. This is not how it works. Route table only routes (directs) traffic according to rules. A routing table is analogous to a distribution map in package delivery. Whenever a node needs to send data to another node on a network, it must first know where to send it. That's what a route table does. In order to control the ingress (TO) and egress (FROM) traffic you set up security groups and NACLs. That's the layer you need to focus on.

I would still to double check: this comment is trying to explain that "Route table is not used for traffic control". However, can we say that:

Setting: There is a VPC, Alice, we are using (local), and another VPC, Bob, we try to connect to.

Statement1: If Bob is not in the route table attached to Alice regardless of other resources/services such as security group etc, then Alice cannot direct traffic, or in plain words cannot send message, to Bob.

Statement2: Even if Bob is not in the route table attached to Alice, but correctly configuring other resources/services, Alice is still possible to receive message from Bob.

Are the statements right or wrong? If it is wrong, why is it? Or if the statement itself is wrong depicted, what is it?