What I have never understood is the school of thought that a carrier could be sunk therefore shouldn't be bought. Every military system in the world has some way of being hard or soft killed - why do carriers get singled out for a special logic?
I can disable an airfield with bombs or chemicals. I can park cars on the runway with IEDs in them. I can kill the pilots in their married quarters with SF. In a full up shooting match I'll give it some arty and tanks. (Let's see how well CCS bears up to that one!) I know exactly where it is and can get a grid for every taxyway inetrsection from google. I can put my mate on the end of the runway and he can tell me whenever a jet takes off and what it was carrying. But the air force seem to a) (understandably) love them and b) think they are in someway impervious whilst QECV is never more than a step away from a watery grave.
Yes a big torpedo, or a big mine, or a really sharp dolphin could put a carrier out of action - but we bought Typhoon knowing SA-20 existed....and we have been training infantrymen ever since the baddies replaced sharpened guava halves with AK-47.
You can sink boats - hardly sets them apart does it? And until the much vaunted RAF convinces me that it could sink a QECV (which it can't - full stop) I remain convinced that the mitigated threat ain't that bad.