I created a google spread sheet to help everyone get a better understanding of the nuke without either overestimating or underestimating its power.
Around 900 to 1,000 nukes can either instantly kill or seriously injure 70% of the US population, and destroy all major cities with a 100,000+ population. One should note that the original author assumed PLARF could switch between 150kt and 650kt nukes at a whim, which is simply untrue. Historical reasons (DF-31A single warhead deployment) and the very counter-value nature of Chinese deterrence both lead to 650 kt nukes as China's nuclear backbone. The silo base would very likely be deployed with 650 kt warheads. Ultimately, it will take fewer warheads than 900 for China to achieve the same strategic goal.
There is nothing wrong with stopping at 1,550 nuclear stockpile since it suffices to ensure a MAD with the US and more nukes don't bring much more counter-value capability with diminishing returns. Russia and the US put their treaty limit at 1,550 after their own calculations about "How many nukes are enough?"
The bottom line is that 1,550 nukes make a guarantee of a counter-value plan, which can deter the US from live-fire aggression.
But WHAT IF, the deterrence fails? Either some lunatics think they can disarm China by launching a first strike against silo fields or inadvertent escalation. Though very
unlikely to happen, here comes the general second strike.
1. A 1,000-warhead counter-value plan(Silo-based ICBMs alone can do this.)
2. Naval bases and shipyards for US SSBNs
3. US Strategic bomber airfields
4. The US non-deployed nuclear stockpile
It will still leave about one hundred warheads as negotiating bargaining chips after the first salvo.
