Since you're now unbanned, gonna have to comment on this.
Uh, yea, breaking is an important skill unto itself, much like the drive in golf. British players coming from snooker are basically golfers who have good short games but can't drive the ball further than 200 yards nor do they have the strokes to hit a 3 iron 190 yards out buried in the rough (the equivalent in pool would something like the Corey Deuel stroke shot in the Mosconi Cup).
As for the safety play, it's more demanding in 9 ball. You can play distance 99% percent of the time in snooker and be completely safe. In 9 ball, if you don't lock up, you could be dead, especially against kick masters like Efren and other Filipinos, or against creative shotmakers like Earl and Deuel. The harder shotmaking of snooker is exactly why it's easier to play safe in comparison to offensive oriented games like 9 and 10 ball.
Watching Chinese 8 ball, the defensive play was a joke, and worse yet, it's less likely a player gets punished for sloppy defensive mistakes if his opponent's balls lay tough relative to the table, like near the rail.
The whole tighter pockets=harder game is about the stupidest argument in the cue sport world. Bigger pockets just means more opportunities for your opponent to run racks and run out from difficult positions. A table with bigger pockets means you're never safe and requires you to be more attentive to your defensive play, and even your offensive game, because one miss could sit you down for 3 or 4 racks and possibly more.
People who cite the bigger pocket argument must only play against the ghost. In that scenario, sure, bigger pockets=easier game, but most of us like to play against others.