[TulliusCicero]

This is like saying, "well sure they invaded us with their military, but we don't want to be like them, so let's not take any military action in response."

Fundamentally, aggressive action as a response is not equivalent to being the initiator of aggression. Hence: turnabout is fair play. If someone punches you economically, it's entirely fair and reasonable to punch them back. It does not make you "just like them" to defend yourself.

[mileycyrusXOXO]

That's a poor analogy. It's more like they censor their citizens so we should censor ours!

[TulliusCicero]

No, it's a perfect analogy, you just don't like it. If you actually had a valid point, you'd bother to explain the issue, but you didn't. Telling.

The US isn't censoring it based on content anyway -- in fact, the US government's ability to censor much of anything based on content is severely constrained by the First Amendment -- the US doesn't like the fact that it's controlled by the PRC. But blocking businesses from a rival nation is a trade issue, not a speech issue.

China is a rival and opponent of the US on the geopolitical stage. It's entirely reasonable to respond to trade restrictions with trade restrictions.