Crimea started with a lot more aggression than that (I mean, when it truly started. Like I said, the back and forth over border territory has been going on for decades in the Baltics)

More aggression than what? Seemed pretty aggressive to me. Subvertive, but aggressive.

And let's remember that Ukraine is NOT in NATO and therefore a very bad example.

Ukraine is not in NATO, but it is a good example to look at in what could happen to a Baltic state. I was not talking about NATO's relationship with Ukraine, but Russian aggression.

if they know that NATO won't give a shit

They only know NATO won't give a shit after they test the waters. They do this by implementing the very strategy you seem to be familiar with on a Baltic state. Russia in its current state and military will not commit to total war over the Baltics if they know NATO would respond. They would not test the waters with an all out attack.

Remember, we are talking about decades here, not tomorrow. NATO's death and Russian aggression go hand in hand. It will not be a single instance of massive advance of Soviet Deep Battle doctrine.

It will occur over time after prodding and pushing territories and will absolutely be dependent on the standing of NATO's strength. Which is the point of this thread and my initial comment.

Also: I'll repeat again, I doubt that you have any authority to call the border land "meaningless" or to say which side it belongs to.

And again, I will try to help you understand the word "meaningless" in this context is not my opinion. In the context, I meant it as a platitude from member states that do not wish to go to war for a minor piece of territory. Again, in the context, Germany does not wish to go to war with Russia over a meaningless strip of land.

I am unsure if you are not a native speaker, and I will apologize if you felt I offended you with the usage of meaningless, but it absolutely belongs in the conversation, because alliance complacency -- as this entire discussion is about -- will lead to these words being used. Which, again, is the context I used it in.