Kingfish wrote:LWD:Why? Given all the other tasks that the RN had what makes this so important.
Because preventing the enemy from improving it's strategic position is one of the most vitally important objective of any nation locked in a war. Germany's capture of Norway negated the British strategy of bottling up the KM in the Baltic, while at the same time safeguarded her northern flank. Also look at the effect it had on the Arctic convoys, or how it facilitated the breakout by Bismark and PE.
What is this but a proof that Britain prioritised the defense of North Africa? Yes, there were those in WWII who defended everything (Schicklgruber) or more than they could defend (Djugashvill), but this is strongly advised against in warfare by sages both ancient (Sun Tzu) and modern (Der Alte Fritz).
And pray tell, what major inconvenience did Kriegsmarine put Britain and Commonwealth in compared to e.g. getting a hold of MidEast oilfields?
And Dieppe. So LW got some licks in, in a few particular situations where it had the upper hand. So what? It never stopped an action of the British-Commonwealth armed forces cold in its tracks.The LW did not demonstrate the ability in this time frame to stop the RN from acomplishing just about any mission it undertook.
I'm not sure how you come to that conclusion. Look at the reason(s) for the cancellation of Op Hammer, or the fiasco of the allied landings at Namsos and Ornes beach. These were operations that were severely effected by Luftwaffe intervention.