Honolulu isn't a major population center? Attacking like for like isn't an escalation, you're the only person who insists that degrading Chinese AA capabilities in response to China doing the same means attacking specifically population centers, as if that's the sum total of assets.
Again if you think think all these things are the same then fine (including the dual use C2 part which you keep ignoring), we can end the discussion here. Every possible U.S. strategy is equally escalatory as any of the others, and we can do whatever we want
We don't have to consider possible Chinese responses. We don't have to care about dual use targets. It's all the same, we are responding in kind, the risk of nuclear escalation and strategic cyberattacks doesn't change, hooray, problem solved
Again: you're the only person insisting the US degrading Chinese AA means specifically means hitting population centers. This is a pointless convo until you recognize that you're steelmanning a hypothetical Chinese surprise attack while strawmanning the retaliation.
Some are in cities, much of it isn't. www.ausairpower.net/APA-PLA-Seco...
Some assets certainly are, others are surrounded by farm fields or forests. Why assume people saying the US would have to degrade that AA mean "bomb Beijing?" climateviewer.org/history-and-...