I see a lot of contributors talk about history of warfare and draw conclusions related to the prevailing global situation. The problem with the analysis is that the battlefield strategies significantly changed from 1530s. Navy started making the difference and the ground forces took the second place. Introduction of steal, and steam engine further moved the warfare to modern times. This was a paradigm shift in the military history. From then on, stronger navies determined the status of a country.
Amazingly in 16th century, Khairudin Barbarosa started this new trend of warfare. He successfully used Ottoman navy to beat Spanish and Italian forces. After that the race was on. 100 years later Spanish and Portuguese took the top Naval force spot. This state lasted until another 100 years when British became the number 1 with the defeat of Spanish armada at Dover.
British remained #1 naval force until WWII when US took the top spot. This state will exist until some other country comes up with a stronger navy.
On a side note, Japan was the only non-European country to master the art of modern Naval warfare. Adm. Yamamoto is prime example of Japanese Naval skills.
P.S. I consider Air force as simply and extension of Naval force. You ought to have a strong Navy in order to command an effective Air force.
