I slightly dispute this!
Then let's strongly agree to slightly disagree on some of it.
I must first mention that my view on some might be biased as I'm from Europe and all my information about how things are currently in the US might come from already biased sources and on top of that things work a bit different here when it comes to lobbying, so I might get this entirely wrong.
Anyhow, I think Facebook right now has no chance of going to war, they have money but they lack power and they have a lot of hurdles to overcome, the new administration is looking for money, corporations and big tech companies are the usual targets both for their stash and for looking good to voters, they are in trouble with the propaganda during elections and the covid "fake stories", launching a media campaign now won't look good. And most important, they can't even take on Apple and are howling at them like coyotes for months

As for the implied adoption of
BTC through them, probably it was also scary for some as the authorities constantly denying FB might have been more harmful than acceptance would have been positive, some might have seen cryptos as something that will never get overall approval. My opinion is that the move of Paypal with its PPbitcoins (or how do we call that CFD they are offering people) have done more for
BTC's reputation than FB will ever manage to do.
but they have helped to open the floodgates to Bitcoin in a small way
Probably small is the keyword here.
Maybe I've rushed a bit in denying that even a small percentage of the population might have come to
BTC through them but I still think that in terms of both % of the users base and overall sums bought their contribution was minimal.