From the Gulf War to the global war on terror, and then to the troop surge in Afghanistan, US military operations in the Middle East have spanned almost the entire international political cycle of the past few decades. Accompanying these wars are not only geopolitical conflicts and massive fiscal expenditures, but also an often overlooked variable: monetary policy. This article reviews several key wars since 1990, examining the subtle relationship between war, fiscal pressure, and Federal Reserve policy: after numerous Middle East conflicts, the Federal Reserve has often stabilized the economy and financial markets through interest rate cuts or easing policies. Based on this, Arthur Hayes (co-founder of BitMEX) offers a market-oriented observation: when geopolitical conflicts escalate and fiscal spending expands, a loose monetary environment often follows, which can significantly impact risk assets, including Bitcoin. Under the direction of Donald J. Trump, hailed as one of the "most peace-loving presidents" in US history, the US War Department partnered with OpenAI to launch an offensive proxy AI weapon: a potentially lethal new Apple iOS. Once implanted into a country's network infrastructure, this operating system would attempt to drive a "regime change." Such regime change is often accompanied by indiscriminate bombing of military and civilian infrastructure, causing massive casualties and costing hundreds of billions, or even trillions, of dollars. After local political resistance is destroyed, a new political elite, fostered by the United States, emerges. They draw funds from American taxpayers and extract resources from local communities, depositing these funds into their own private wealth accounts at JPMorgan Chase. Over time, public discontent with this rule, similar to the "Vichy-style regimes" fostered by the United States in the Middle East, gradually builds, eventually leading to its violent overthrow. In its place stands a more localized, and often more reactionary, oppressive, and even bloodthirsty political structure. This completes the entire "sales cycle," allowing OpenAI to launch its next-generation products. Since 1985, the year my consciousness began recording human experience within this so-called "quantum continuum," Pax Americana, in the name of "justice," has launched a near-constant crusade against Middle Eastern oil-producing nations and key geostrategic nodes of oil and gas pipelines. From a macro perspective, a chart generated by Perplexity's latest Computer model attempts to illustrate the human costs of war.The chart focuses on three key indicators: the percentage of federal budget allocated to Veterans Affairs (VA), the nominal total federal government spending, and the effective federal funds rate. It also marks a series of representative (but not exhaustive) US missile strikes or full-scale wars against Middle Eastern countries. Data shows that spending on veterans' affairs is growing at almost twice the rate of the overall federal budget. More importantly, and this is the focus of this article, the Federal Reserve tends to quickly lower the cost of money almost every time "American peace" launches a major "selective war" in the Middle East. Although every US president in my lifetime has tried to convince the public that those Middle Eastern wars, which appear like video games on the evening news, do not bring real suffering to the only "important human beings" in the universe—American soldiers—the data clearly shows that America's obsession with military adventures in the Middle East is costly in terms of American lives. The so-called "ovarian lottery" led me to be born on this continent, defined by humankind with crooked lines, and called "America." In the past four decades, both Republican presidents (of the "red team") and Democratic presidents (of the "blue team") have launched missiles or even waged full-scale wars against some Middle Eastern country that they deemed "deserving of attack." It's as if, once elected president, high-ranking officials take you to a top-secret room, clamp your testicles with pliers, and force you to swear an oath: during your term, you must at least make one Middle Eastern country feel the "heat of democracy," or face the consequences. Whether you believe the various conspiracy theories currently circulating to explain why the US bombs certain Middle Eastern countries, this chart presents a remarkably clear fact in my lifetime: since 1985, every US president has engaged in military conflict with one or more Middle Eastern countries. Therefore, when President Trump now talks about potentially "assassinating" Iran's Supreme Leader Khamenei and openly supports a "people's revolution" to overthrow Iran's theocratic regime, we investors are forced to consider: how will our investment portfolios be affected as Trump embarks on this "political rite of passage" that every US president has undergone? Considering that I'm just a simple-minded guy in the crypto world with a bit of a "toxic masculinity," my logic for judging Bitcoin's rise and fall is actually very simple.The longer Trump invests in the extremely costly undertaking of "nation-building" in Iran, the more likely the Federal Reserve is to fund a new round of "American peace" military adventures in the Middle East by lowering the cost of money and increasing the money supply. To verify this hypothesis, let's review the history of the Federal Reserve's policy actions after each major military conflict in the Middle East since 1985: 1990 Gulf War: At the first policy meeting after the outbreak of the war, President George H.W. Bush chose to keep interest rates unchanged, but at the same time hinted that if the war lasted too long, monetary easing might be necessary. The August 21, 1990 FOMC statement stated: "The increased uncertainty arising from events in the Middle East, and the potential for weaker-than-expected economic performance, has made the formulation of an effective monetary policy extremely complex." "Several members believed that developments were likely to point in a direction where policy easing was necessary at some point to offset the economic weakness that had already emerged before the rise in oil prices." Subsequently, the Federal Reserve cut interest rates consecutively at its November and December 1990 meetings, describing the war in a somewhat euphemistic way as a significant uncertainty influencing its decision. The Gulf War ultimately ended in March 1991. "The sharp decline in business and consumer confidence likely reflects not only developments in the Middle East itself, but also uncertainty about the future of the region and its impact on oil prices." In other words, the Federal Reserve chose to ease policy despite inflationary pressures caused by soaring oil prices. The 2001 Global War on Terror (GWOT): The "son" (President George W. Bush) launched the "Global War on Terror" rapidly after the collapse of the Twin Towers of the World Trade Center in New York. Shortly after, Iraq and Afghanistan became targets of cruise missile interrogation-style strikes. To stabilize economic confidence, the Federal Reserve almost immediately accelerated its pace of interest rate cuts. At an emergency meeting following the attacks, then-Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan stated, "Clearly, the events of last week have brought at least a higher level of fear and uncertainty, which has put significant downward pressure on asset prices and increased the probability of asset price deflation, the impact of which on the economy is obvious. Therefore, I propose a 50 basis point reduction in the target for the federal funds rate." Essentially, if economic confidence under the "American peace" system falters and leads to a decline in asset prices, the Federal Reserve must act swiftly. And the "prescription," as always, is cheaper and more abundant currency.The FOMC statement on November 6, 2001, stated: "While the reallocation of resources for enhanced security may limit productivity gains for some time, the long-term outlook for productivity growth and the overall economy remains positive." The 2009 "Surge": The "Holy Spirit" (President Barack Obama) – Ordinary people in Iraq, Syria, and Afghanistan may have thought that a Nobel Peace Prize-winning president wouldn't unleash hellfire on their countries. But this expectation proved to be an illusion, and false hopes are often the most destructive. While Obama didn't launch a new large-scale Middle East war, he did expand the troop presence in Afghanistan (the so-called "Surge") because, in his view, it was a "just war." Given that the Federal Reserve had already lowered interest rates to zero by the end of 2008 and begun massive "money printing" through quantitative easing (QE), there was little more that could be done on the monetary policy front when Obama expanded the troop deployment to the Middle East. The cost of capital was near zero, and liquidity was virtually unlimited. The American war machine and its contractors naturally reap huge profits. Iran in 2026: The fate of the "Messiah" (President Donald Trump) seems to have played a rather ironic joke: after surviving an assassination attempt during the 2024 presidential campaign, Trump has almost "come back to life." As Kanye sang, "Jesus walks." Now I can probably talk about Kanye—after all, he has "bowed down," right? Trump's performance in office, and the re-election prospects of his "red team" Republican members in the November election, will largely depend on whether financial asset markets rise or fall, and whether oil prices fall or rise. Since the fall of Shah Pahlavi in Iran in 1979, regime change in Iran has been a long-standing obsession of the American bipartisan political elite. Against this backdrop, the Federal Reserve has every political "legitimacy" to significantly ease monetary policy. If the Fed fails to fulfill its duty and finances the plan to "rebuild Iran into a US vassal state" with cheaper, more currency, it will be seen as "unpatriotic." Trading Strategy: At this moment, we don't know how long Trump will maintain his interest in reshaping Iran's political structure—a process that could cost hundreds of billions, or even trillions of dollars. We also don't know how much political pain he can endure before backing down, given the geopolitical and financial market pressures. Therefore, a more prudent approach is to observe how the situation develops.The real time to "enter the market aggressively" will be after the Federal Reserve cuts interest rates or resumes printing money to align with the government's policy objectives in Iran. At that point, it's time to buy large amounts of Bitcoin and high-quality altcoins like $HYPE. [BlockBeats]