And there are past as well as current ones. Our naval strategy has never stayed constant. It has had to change with the threats and the times. "From the Sea" was as valid for its time as Mahan and War Plan Orange were in their days. While it is true that: "China, Russia, North Korea and Iran did not spring up out of the ground yesterday. Nor did supersonic cruise missiles, diesel electric subs etc."-- China had no carriers, stealth jets, cyber technology nor DF-21 or 26 ballistic missiles, and its numbers of everything else were vastly lower, and of poorer quality. The Soviet Union was gone. The Russian threat of the time was no more.
Our strategy of the time then reflected the times. We certainly could--and apparently did--predict that China would rise, but I never once heard you (or anyone) forecast a DF-21. The nature of the threat had to be revealed before an appropriate response could happen. Just exclaiming that we must always be prepared is not helpful. Be prepared for what, specifically? The challanges to maintaining sea power are myriad. There is no one singular "Seapower Ship" design that can be cranked out which will address all threats. Navies have always been composed of mixes of vessel types, and those types have changed with technological inovations, and with different opponents' abilities, and frequently different generations of vessels serve side by side.
So, you make these sort of sweeping pronouncements as if this is the only way it can be seen. The resulting impression I get then only comes out as "Wrong, wrong wrong! Everything is wrong!" Which is no doubt how you feel, but isn't necessarily correct. Which is why I expressed myself as I did earlier.