Would it not be fairer to say that a mast built to what is considered to be "normal" strength and specification is going to be strong enough to withstand "normal" conditions around Cape Horn at least a few times? While a mast not built strong enough is likely to fail.
Regardless of its material?
If the wrong circumstances come along, no mast or ship is strong enough to resist them. Titanic being a case in hand. If you keep hitting heavy storms, it is bound to reduce the life of your mast, though maybe not for quite a long time
Aluminium masts are as likely to fail through thousands upon thousands of tiny flexing cycles caused by thousands and thousands of miles sailing causing metal fatigue and cracking as they are to collapse under the stresses of 1 single enormously powerful event. They may then collapse in a relatively small storm after being fatigued for thousands of miles of easy sailing.
Everything wears out in time. Tree trunks may well be able to flex easily when they are planted in the ground and recover, but when used as a mast in a boat,they are no longer alive and will be dried out and not possess the same ability to recover from excess winds or a rollover or knockdown as when they were alive and rooted to the ground.
Again, if if it's built strong enough to start with, it will survive many more cycles than if it was built too weak in the first place.
But nothing has infinite strength. the best you can do is build it to what is considered to be strong enough for the worst conditions you are likely to encounter on a reasonably regular basis, whether its Aluminium, Wood, GRP, Carbon or a combination.