Yes I know what a FOB is. The reason the harriers didn’t operate in such things in Afghanistan and Iraq is because the runways were not bombed out and carriers were available and CAP was in place. Duhh. But they operated exactly to spec on the FOB at San Carlos, contrary to your assertions that it didn’t operate in any FOB in action.
A Navy ship QUALIFIES as a navy FOB. Duhh.
As a sailor you can just either accept the facts on the ground and let the Argentinians call it the ‘black death’ that saved you or stick your head further in the sand.
The Harrier never could fulfill its mission of operating in a combat environment in a forward area because it simply could not land in the middle of nowhere near a FOB or at the time an LP/OP and had to fly from an airfield no different than any standard jet. It had to take off and land like the zoomers you dislike because if it did not it could not carry a large enough payload to support ground forces.
Unlike you I was in the Corps and working in NAVAIR during the debate to keep Harriers or stick with legacy airframes until the F-18 was operational. Obviously you did not read the link I sent you. Either you are just looking for an argument or you are just a dumbass.