This counterfactual turns on competing strategic priorities. Germany wanted a short war and regarded France as the decisive objective, whereas Norway offered greater value in a prolonged conflict. In this reading, Berlin would be unlikely to divert enough supplies to sustain a serious two-front campaign. Norway was the likelier theatre to be starved of resources. An Allied advance through Norway might eventually have opened further pressure against German-held Denmark. The campaign's survival therefore depended on logistics and on which theatre had first claim on supplies and attention.
Notable Point · 8:41-9:37
Why Germany might have sacrificed Norway
If Norway demanded a sustained second front, German planners might have limited supplies there to preserve their drive against France.