From this question: Do $AB$ and $BA$ have the same eigenvalues?, I am confused about this solution.
Why is it sufficient to show that every eigenvalue of AB is an eigenvalue of BA? That doesn't seem to prove the case that the eigenvalues of BA are eigenvalues of AB. Why don't you then need to show the other direction?
Also, is this true for the general case of matrices not composed of AB, for all matrices $C,D \in R^{nxn}$?
A more general result:
If $A$ and $B$ are $n \times n$ matrices, then we have for a scalar $\lambda \ne 0$:
$ \lambda$ is an eigenvalue of $AB$ iff $ \lambda$ is an eigenvalue of $BA$ .
Proof: if $ \lambda$ is an eigenvalue of $AB$ , then there is $x \ne > 0$ such that
$(*)$ $ABx= \lambda x$.
Let $y:=Bx$. Then $y \ne 0$ (otherwise we would get from $(*)$ that $ > \lambda =0$ or $x=0$).
Now we have
$$ BAy=BABx=B(ABx)=B( \lambda x)=\lambda Bx = \lambda y.$$
It follows that $\lambda$ is an eigenvalue of $BA$.