Scholars have been arguing whether the Cold War was an intellectual conflict or a military-political struggle.
The battle, however, was more inclined to moral disagreements between members of the socialists and the capitalists. The latter was made up of the United States and its allies, while the USSR and its allies in the eastern bloc spearheaded communism. The reason that the conflict is considered more ideological than military-political is that, aside from a few proxy wars across the globe, there were no physical fights between the two main superpowers. This was seen especially in Vietnam and Korea, where American troops fought against their opponents with the support of the USSR. If it was driven by the idea of politico-military struggle, then the US and USSR would boldly engage each other in a direct armed conflict.
Ideology was more important to USSR for being the foundation upon which the nation had been built.
The West had uncomfortable with the spread of the ideology and the revolutionary threat that Bolsheviks articulated (Ruggie 553-570). The antagonistic and traditional attitude towards the communist east was marched by the deep-seated fear by the Soviets in the capitalist society and the political intentions of their leaders. A Huge amount of monetary resources were used by the two sides of the cold war with massive stockpiles of weapons being made for protection in case of an actual attack. It should, however, be noted from this scenario that the military motive was a secondary objective with the ideological struggle coming first. From the waste of resources which negatively affected the citizens from both sides, the effects of the war were almost equivalent to that of a real physical war. This difference was as a result of lack of blood spilling on either side of the two great warring countries.
Ruggie, John Gerard. "Third try at world order? America and multilateralism after the Cold War." Political Science Quarterly 109.4 (1994): 553-570.