Nah, you're good. Don't worry about it.
That one, concepts like compassion and generosity are in and of themselves virtuous behavior. That two, detachment isn't about separating one from reality but a way to live with it. That three, deeds matter?
You'll find me hard-pressed to disagree here. Stoicism is often presented as a very "practical" philosophy, the problem is in practice everyone has their own idea of "compassion," "generosity," "virtuous behaviour." And in the modern era "Stoic" has turned into a kind of adjective describing someone indifferent to pain and pleasure, kind of not caring, which you're right, isn't what Stoicism is all about.
In order to not be moved by undue influences one would have to exercise self-restraint though, unless you had no urge whatsoever to curse at the person who cut you off in traffic. That is the main goal of insight meditation - develop the mind such that you won't engage in unskillful activity. What you wrote actually reminded me of the David Foster Wallace. There is detachment from simply not caring and there's detachment from deep, penetrating awareness, which can take quite a bit of effort.
The problem is always, what do you do? Would yelling at the person who cut you off maybe help them? Would you honk the horn? Maybe they would think twice, like oh jeez I need to be more careful driving or I could cause an accident? Or would it merely aggravate them and potentially escalate the situation? So in practice all actions have the potential to either be virtuous or cause suffering, and sometimes other people's mindset can affect that. We have a general idea of what is good and bad, but not always. Reading the room is a complex art. As for generosity:
Should you drop everything and dedicate your whole life to the alleviation of suffering? Should you abandon personal ambition and a career to help others? Work in the prisons? That was something I struggled with mightily as a Buddhist. The key statement you make is this.
Or I love and adore my country, but I need to exercise that love and adoration with detachment so that I am able to see its flaws and protect myself from falling into a jingoistic mindset.
Desiring not to be a jingoist or loving a country is a personal judgment in itself. What flaws you might find where you live might be different from which flaws somebody else finds. American exceptionalism, for example, might be good for the economy. Would you go to war to defend your country? One could argue the most compassionate response is to refrain from killing, always, and not to expose yourself to situations that could get you killed. Another might call you a coward who's okay with fascism spreading.
Stoicism teaches the development of self-control and fortitude as a means of overcoming destructive emotions; the philosophy holds that becoming a clear and unbiased thinker allows one to understand the universal reason (logos).
I don't disagree clear thinking and rationality are possible and desirable, but it becomes difficult outside of formal logic and mathematics. One of my issues studying economics were a lot of my professors would treat their research as absolute, scientific truth, rather than essentially a political argument backed up by data. One study involved arguing government-funded childcare was a disaster as its recipients performed worse on developmental metrics. Rational, correct, but completely ignoring certain "emotional" assumptions being made.
The Stoic ethic espouses a deterministic perspective; in regard to those who lack Stoic virtue, Cleanthes once opined that the wicked man is "like a dog tied to a cart, and compelled to go wherever it goes".
Unless Donald Trump gets impaled by a series of micrometeroids I'm not sure fate is working to balance the scales. The emphasis on deterministic fate reminds me of the Greeks, their idea even the Gods couldn't escape the fates, which I disagree with.