It will require a much different strategy than with the Soviets. We don't have a fundamental political difference in belief with the Chinese. The Chinese are ul

It will require a much different strategy than with the Soviets. We don't have a fundamental political difference in belief with the Chinese. The Chinese are ultra-capitalists with a technocracy leadership (although the u.s. is more lead by lawyers than engineers, so maybe there's a conflict there). It's not even clear if a conflict is necessary. The Chinese mostly care about resources and economics in China - they are determined to have a minimum percentage of economic growth in order to continue pulling their population out of poverty. They have brought something like 500,000,000 Chinese into the middle class and want to continue doing so, and this requires economic growth. Their military is mostly run by officers that are running factories - not even on the side, it's just normal. Granted, there's friction in places like in the South China Sea. But the real conflict will be in Africa - there are entire Chinese cities in Africa as they move engineers and resources to take on large engineering projects and exploit the vast resources of the area. But the u.s. has seemingly abandoned Africa (and South America) and instead is putting all of their money into the middle east and Afghanistan/Iraq/Iran. I wonder if the u.s. will just concede Africa to the Chinese or if there will be conflict in the future. (If you do a google search you'll come across articles about chinese ghost cities in Africa, but keep in mind that all of these ghost cities, even in china and mongolia, are eventually filled with chinese)