>>
>Quite a bold claim, knowing that using the war analogy is actually nonsensical because you're pretty much risking not only money, but your life. You can re-earn money, but you can't re-buy your life.
Executive Order 6102 is an executive order signed on April 5, 1933, by US President Franklin D. Roosevelt "forbidding the hoarding of gold coin, gold bullion, and gold certificates within the continental United States." Would you mind to explain the logic behind someone would goes extra miles just to stop you to get money (gold coin), would you care to explain?

>There's literally nothing wrong with having high risk high reward investments as long as you practice proper bank roll management(obviously going all-in is a bad idea), and that you actually know that the investment you're making is high risk high reward in the first place.
It is obviously very wrong no matter how you argue, go ahead and gambling on the Las Vegas with all your very best practice management.

>>
>Between why must the risk only related to war? What about investment risk and similar risk as well?
Executive Order 6102 is an executive order signed on April 5, 1933, if it’s not a war declaration then what is it?

>People took a high risk believing in btc and they were handsomely rewarded, I for once will not take any unnecessary risk except it has to do with earning something in return or a positive benefit, to me, not all type of risk that is worth taking, 
Is it not obvious enough nobody would want to take risk when they know very well?

>especially the type that has to do with war should be highly considered before doing anything that could lead to regrets. In any situation there are always certain people who will benefit from it reason why it is very important to think before acting.
Wars is a lot of risk taking too, do you blindly believe they don’t make risk management before going to a war?

>>
>Soldiers are trained before they are deployed to a battlefield. They are equipped - physically, mentally, and emotionally strong enough to do their tasks and duties for the country. In simpler terms, they are fit for their job because, in the first place, that kind of job position requires certain qualifications to be able to secure a spot.
this is just a risk assessment in my humble opinion, they are making sure they can successfully execute the war. If the wars failed they couldn’t make profit.

>But this is totally unrelated to cryptocurrency. World war doesn't equate to crypto. You are making the wrong analogy here.
Executive Order 6102 is an executive order signed on April 5, 1933, by US President Franklin D. Roosevelt "forbidding the hoarding of gold coin, gold bullion, and gold certificates within the continental United States." Is it not slightly related?

>In cryptocurrency, you only risk what you can afford to lose. You should know that the moment you entered the crypto world.
what do you know? the coin?

>High risk, high return is applicable only if you know what you are doing and you analyzed and studied your move before doing so. Risking a high amount will be nonsense if you'll invest it in the wrong coins. Hence, you should do your own technical analysis first and make sure you'll regret nothing once things go wrong.
Do you know Las Vegas casino? High risk high return? You can beat them into net loss?

>>
If you compared between war and investing, they are totally different. It's not comparable, war is a risk that is very visible in its impact.  Investing is a step to financial freedom, so the risks cannot be seen with simple logic.  You must learn risk management to measure the risk of investing.  War and investment is not an apple to apple comparison.  Your logic is slightly wrong comparing the two.
explain this if you think the logic is wrong, why they goes extra miles just to stop gold? Executive Order 6102 is an executive order signed on April 5, 1933, by US President Franklin D. Roosevelt "forbidding the hoarding of gold coin, gold bullion, and gold certificates within the continental United States."