The go/no-go compromise you describe has the possibility of becoming a major point of internal friction during any operation planning process and certainly no easier in the case of CATF and CLF. Both commanders have very real concerns, and large forces, that must be addressed before any landing could be made. “Slapping the table” on what constitutes prohibitive interference for a mission is often less of a hard fast rule and more art, with the potential for large differences of opinion particularly when the level of acceptable risk has been determined to be high. Each commander will want the risks to his force (and his people) to be as low as possible but still accomplish the mission, however the CATF and CLF as you point out will likely have
