Archimedes,
Understood. Very good answer. It's all about capability, what the govt wants to do in terms of force projection, and what the nation can afford. CVF is a capability, just as much as fighters and nuclear bombers.
If we are to remain unemotive, let's not descend into interservice bickering. Every part of the British military plays a part. The CVS's have been in continuous service throughout the period stated by Jackonicko as a time when they have been not required! That's fairly emotive stuff...
Whilst your points about Fighters and Tornadoes are interesting, exactly the same observation Jackonicko makes about carriers can be made about any other element of the armed forces. Let's face it, they have not been defending the UK since WW2 and the fighters have not been needed for air defence of the realm since about 1943, but we still see them as being important. It seems to me that that is why the UK have Armed Forces whereas lesser countries have Defence Forces. The UK doesn't want to fight at home...very sensible!
All the British Armed Forces have been used in other ways since they finished WW2. CVF has been declared as needed up until one RAF flag rank puts the required aircraft forward as a savings measure. Its a political point often made at his level to demonstrate to politicians what their decisions will cost in terms of capability. I hope he is not serious, or that nobody takes him seriously.
My point is that you should fight the cuts because if you lose something, then another capability will be attacked. Armed Forces cost money and the UK is one of the few countries that does it well.