The questions upon which the argument you attempt to make are themselves flawed.
What does this prove? Is the place of standing significant or the statue? The argument of your question is premised on another question/point which you have left out. Why would one be in front of the statue in the first place? So you should have asked, is it ok to build statues or give some significance to statues and go to them and stand in front of them? You didn't ask that because the answer is clear. The question you did ask is thus irrelevant. Also, an act does not become haram simply because of its being performed in front of a statue (unless of course one is prostrating). Why mention statue? Why not similarly ask, is it ok to perform istighatha in front of a wall, car, tree, shoes, books, mountain, etc? Again, you don't mention those things, and specify statue because your question is incomplete and leaves out why someone would be in front of a statue in the first place.If asking for things from dead people was ok, would it be ok to do this in front of a statue of the dead person? You might say 'statues are haram,' but ok, let's say the features are obscured.
This all sounds like an appeal to emotions. It seeks to inspire in readers images or ideas of someone performing an act in front of a statue.
One could ask your question to a practitioner of tawassul (where one does not use the language of calling) also. Is it ok to perform tawassul in front of a statue? The question is useless as an argument in either case.
Similarly one could ask, what is the reason we do not perform tawassul (where one does not use the language of calling) through Ya`uq, Nasr, or Sayyidina `Isa (as)? Why did Sayyidina `Umar (ra) perform tawassul through Sayyidina `Abbas (ra) and not through Sayyidina `Isa (as) or another prophet?