US is also open to the idea to use military force and not only on their neighbours but also on countries far away.

US is in cold war with China because China might soon be economicaly getting upper hand.

I don't get your first paragraph. Of course the US is open to the idea of using military force against, well, pretty much anyone. I don't see how that's relevant, other than as some form of pointing out hypocrisy? Or are you actually saying that "because the US is prepared to do its own military action, it categorically doesn't enter cold wars with other countries based on which military actions the other country could do"? I don't understand.

Hypocrisy mostly. You can’t tell others to stop doing what you keep doing.

The US considers all of LATAM as his own back yard. Why can’t China consider all of Asia as its own back yard?

This is what upsets people, the sheer size of hypocrisy.

So two wrongs make a right?

If your military is powerful enough, yes.

The point is that the US has set a precedence on military power around the world. The US told the world that using military power for your own country's benefit is ok to do. So why can't China?

No the GP, but their point is that the US can't complain about how China treats the rest of Asia when it looks so similar to how the US has treated Latin America.

That doesn't mean either side was right, or that one justifies the other. Only that the pot should into call the kettle black.

>or that one justifies the other

That is absolutely the implication here.

I definitely read it differently, but maybe I did misunderstand them.

The commenter's focus on hypocrisy reads to me more like they take issue with the US calling China out for this rather then justifying what China is doing because they aren't the only ones.

The first one :)

My point is that you lose all moral high ground lecturing countries on how they should behave when you're doing the exactly same thing.

I was more interested in their answer, I don't think you have much more insight into what they meant than I do

Hypocrisy mostly.

Without the West, China would collapse economically. I mean literally collapse, ever heard of tofu-dreg?

The only way that China gets an upper hand economically is by selling products to the US and the Western world.

If they enter into a conflict where they are cordoned off, their export oriented economy would crash immediately.

A war between China and USA is impossible to win for either sides, due to both military size, budgets, interdependence, and nuclear weapons arsenal. And this is why it's a cold war.

> The only way that China gets an upper hand economically is by selling products to the US and the Western world.

I am not a geopolitician, but this looks like a little too simplistic perspective, doesn’t it? I mean China diversified its wallet, including by helping to create infrastructures in Africa where there is still a largely growing young population (in contrast to the general trend in the occidental countries, or even what the long standing single child policy led to in China).

If western demand goes away, you think African demand can compensate for that? Domestic would be more realistic, and even there China has nowhere near enough domestic consumption to keep the system running, let alone sustain historical growth rates.

Not really. China has so much manufacturing power that if they limited exports and focused on manufacturing for inland it would have major economic shifts for both china and the west. That's the problem with the world putting all of their manufacturing eggs in one basket

Sell domestically to whom? Domestic buyers ain't buying. That's why they are exporting.

Exactly. It’s Cold War 2.0 this time we trade with them …

The two blocks traded in Cold War 1.0 - there was even direct trade between the US and the Soviet Union - although no denying that trade was a lot smaller than US-China trade is today