> No additional tanks, armies and nuclear weapons needed.

Of course not. The existing ones you depend on to protect the necessary infrastructure and servers of bitcoin are already sufficient.

Exactly, the decentralized nature makes this possible.

...No, the existing armies of the world make it possible. Why do you think Coinbase, Kraken, etc, are in the US and not in Somalia? Hint: it involves a police and an army.

You are talking about centralized exchanges, which is something built on top of Bitcoin - much like the current banking systems. You are not required to use that with Bitcoin. With Bitcoin someone anywhere can have a "bank account" where the asset doesn't loose its value based on local circumstances.

I assume you argue that a single army/government could take out/control miners - which would be the better discussion to have. That's where we would talk about the value of the Bitcoin network.

No, I mean that bitcoin as a whole would be back to 2010 values should these exchanges not exist. The only reason bitcoin has value is that leeches decided to speculate on it, and leeches need a centralized exchange.

Centralized exchanges are the reason you don't pay 10000 bitcoin for a pizza. They're the reason why it's even accepter, because there's at least one large place that will exchange your coins for cash.

Calling Bitcoin owners leeches seems a bit of a stretch.

In my opinion there is little to absolutely no reason to ever change Bitcoin back to cash. Maybe take a loan against or rent it out to others for cash interest, if you really want cash.

I don't need a bank. I choose to use a bank for the services they offer. Switching currencies doesn't change this, I will still use a bank and a financial system. So bitcoin only helps me if customers are paying me in bitcoin.

I don't value trustlessness, and in fact lack of trust is a vacuum filled by evil.