Trump Praises Israeli Strikes as Bitcoin’s Peaceful Roots Fade
Donald Trump, who’s recently positioned himself as “pro-bitcoin,” called Israel’s missile strikes on Tehran “excellent” last Friday. The attack reportedly killed at least 78 people, many of them civilians. It’s a grim irony—Bitcoin, once hailed as a tool to undermine war funding, is now largely held by the same politicians and corporations that profit from conflict.
UN ambassador Amir Saeid Iravani confirmed the majority of casualties were women and children. Hours before the strike, Trump had posted about seeking a “diplomatic resolution” with Iran. But Israeli officials later claimed the U.S. had given them a “green light,” suggesting the post was a ruse. Whether that’s true or not, the outcome was the same: more bloodshed, more power consolidated.
From Peace to Profits
Bitcoin’s genesis block famously referenced a bank bailout, a nod to its original purpose—cutting the tie between money and state violence. Early adopters like Roger Ver argued crypto could starve governments of war funding. Now, the biggest BTC holders include BlackRock (with over half a million coins), the U.S. government, and pro-state figures like Michael Saylor.
Even exchanges, once seen as neutral platforms, operate under government regulations. In Ukraine and elsewhere, crypto has been used to buy weapons directly. The tool meant to dismantle war economies is now part of them.
Can Crypto Still Disrupt the System?
Some believers cling to the hope that decentralized networks—fast, cheap, and uncensorable—could still shift power away from states. Privacy tech might help. But it’s not just about the code. The real hurdle is collective psychology: realizing no government has our best interests at heart.
As one veteran put it decades ago, wars are waged for profit, not ideals. The same elites pushing conflict today hold stacks of Bitcoin. Maybe the tech hasn’t failed. Maybe we just handed it to the wrong people.
The way out? Opting out. Refusing to fund violence, whether through taxes or compliance. It’s a slow burn, but history’s biggest changes started that way—one person at a time.
