FOD - to give a couple of examples: Leviathan (never completed), Audacious (built as Eagle, entered service after WW2), Bulwark and Albion (both saw active service and survived, but weren't WW2); Perseus (not commissioned until October 1945); Ocean and Glory (operational by end of WW2, but didn't see active operations where there was an enemy threat; survived Korea).
The point that Caz was making, I suspect, is that the line of argument that says that carriers are almost invulnerable - and sadly, we have seen quite a lot of that from carrier proponents elsewhere - is not entirely truthful. Likewise, the point that a lot of British carriers weren't lost in action in WW2 is equally fair. But...
...when we get to the stage of generating long lists simply naming ships we depart sensible, rational analysis of the key question and get into Top Trumps - as seems to happen on virtually ever Harrier-related thread on Pprune...
