Mick, I was presenting a very subjective and simplistic argument to illustrate how a definition of daring could be considered against a risk register.
I had considered the Harrier case but didn't want to cloud the argument. I accept that CO will depart the launch point which is only prudent. However the missions would all have been planned with enough fuel for recovery ie not a one-way mission. It is true there may not have been a conveniently placed Spanish mership when you needed one.
On the question of one-way missions - a mission that has sufficient fuel to reach an LZ is not a one-way mission. A mission that has sufficient fuel for half the planned route is! I accept that walking out is an additional risk.
Was the opposed mission that you refered to RW or FW? If the latter then I would agree that the risk was high. If the former the risk from a covert insertion is lower than from an overt bomb run.