I agree with you in principle, but it's impractical not to respond to attacks from the foe. Even if the US stops, Russia/China won't. It's an ever lasting game of cat and mouse
I'm willing to take that risk when the deescalation is to prevent WW3. The time for a world sheriff passed, and using proxy wars is like playing with matches next to dynamite. Why are we bristling for a status quo foreign policy, which was shown repeatedly to be predicated on false terms of engagement?