I have LONG doubted the reports that China's only got "a few hundred" nuclear warheads. That said that in the 1970s, 80's, 90's...through today.
Don't take MY word for it. Use your own rational mind. Let's start by examining the facts and history of the Atomic Age.
Stop and think: The USA developed the atom bomb. It wasn't long before the Soviet Union also managed the feat.
The USA then developed the H-bomb. The USSR followed suit with their own H-bomb with less of an interval than with the A-bomb. The developmental gap in time had narrowed.
While we were developing ICBM, SLBM, then MIRVing and MARVing technology, with the Russians following suit, China tested its first A-bomb, and later, an H-bomb.
What is important is that the USA didn't know the Atom Bomb would work. UFO's didn't give us the technology. We developed it from scratch, not even knowing it would ever work.
At least the Russians knew the tech tree would ultimately yield fruit.
The technological tree for the Chinese was even easier to climb: Pirating both Russian and US tech, they narrowed the interval even more significantly.
While the USA watched, counted, and signed arms limitation treaties with the Soviet Union, the Chinese arsenal was never taken into account.
Certainly, from the viewpoint of the USSR, it HAD to be: Probably the reason why they needed so many IRBMs, mobile IRBMs, IRBMs that could be moved into Eastern Europe, or quickly repositioned in Asia to defend against/threaten the Chinese.
It's notable that the USSR had been sharing technological expertise with their communist bretheren, but ultimately almost came to blows along the Amur/Ussuri in 1969. The internationalist love affair had ended.
NOW, HERE'S THE MAIN POINT:
The USA got the A-bomb in 1945. By 1975, it had the H-bomb, reliable ICBMs, moon travel, and (I think) MIRVs.
The USSR, by 1975, had the A-bomb, H-bomb, reliable ICBMs that were capable of launching heavier "throw weights" than the USA, and were relying on those heavier warheads in lieu of MIRVs.
China had the A-bomb. And the H-bomb.
A notable fact, one that jumps out and cries for notice, is that the USA took 7 years to develop an H-bomb, 9 to deploy it. The USSR did it in 6 years.
China developed an H-bomb in a mere 3 years after obtaining the A-bomb!
It took the USA from 1945 to 1966 to construct 33,000 warheads. (21 years)
The Soviet Union took from 1949 to 1988 to construct 45,000 warheads. (38 years)
Afterwards, both sides were so busy with "stockpile maintenance" that they were happy to reduce their respective arsenals down to their current levels: About 8.500 for the USA, and about 11,000 for the Russians.
But what about China?
This is the question I've always asked since I was a kid in high school in the 70's.
Oh, I'm told, China's got between 200 and 400 weapons.
That's in 2011.
But I'm a middle-aged man, now. But I'm also a man with a long memory.
They were telling me back in 1977 that China probably had 200-300 weapons, barely able to hit European Russia, soon to be able to hit our West Coast.
I've been paying attention. China's got that manned orbital space thing down pretty good. Thanks, Loral, thanks Clinton, thanks Russia. Thanks, American and Western universities. We've been cutting our own throats for decades, imperiling the lives of our children.
My point is this: YOU CAN'T EXPECT ME TO BELIEVE THAT CHINA, AFTER 47 YEARS, DOES NOT HAVE ICBMS ABLE TO HIT EVERY CORNER OF THE WORLD, AND YOU ALSO CAN'T CONVINCE ME THAT THEIR ARSENAL IS THE SAME--LOW HUNDREDS--THAT WAS STATED IN THE LATE 1970'S.
Remember, they didn't have to invent the tech.
Their progression has been much faster than ours.
I have long suspected their arsenal now DWARFS ours.
Obama has called our ICBMs "the President's weapons." (Google it.)
Obama has stated that it is his goal to reduce the American arsenal down to the 3000 range, and from there, to the "high hundreds." This would WELCOME a decapitating first strike.
You can get up from Pearl Harbor.
But there will be no getting up to fight again after a nuclear Pearl Harbor. Order of magnitude different.
China's had more than enough time to develop tens of thousands of weapons, while we reduce down to the hundreds.
This is national SUICIDE.
Also, I've read that university report (a PowerPoint). It's scary as hell. The Chinese have built 3,000 miles of tunnel.
Again, the Chinese have built 3,000 miles of tunnel.
Still don't get it? THINK about it. What's the cost to bore through rock?
How many meters of tunnel PER warhead? They're using mobile launchers...they hope to launch, reload, rinse and repeat. They're also IMPOSSIBLE to count and verify.
This makes China invulnerable to a first strike, and puts them in a great position to blackmail us later, as we have fixed silos in known locations. We don't use road-mobile ICBMs. Only our SLBMs give us some security, to be honest, and the Navy's going to cut scale back our boomers in size to about 2/3 of their current size.
Again, hiding our head in the sand is national SUICIDE. Let's not be a part of it. Let's oppose this on any forum on which we are able!
Sauron (Because I give a fracking damn!)
I would add that, no matter where you estimate Chinese development to be: slower than ours (because we're so much smarter), on par with ours (we're all human, equal), or faster than ours (hey, Russia/USA shared its tech with us) then you should expect China to have tens of thousands of warheads.
In other words, follow the same course Russia and America did.
It's dangerously wishful thinking to assume anything other than that.
And if the Chinese are unhappy with our worst-case assumption, then, invite our inspectors over for a verification party.
Trust, but verify. (Reagan: from a Russian proverb)