We don't need both. We actually just need nuclear, and no amount of throwing away my tax money on wind boondoggles will change that. The Norwegian Labour Party royally screwed the Norwegians with wind, they had to make all other energy much more expensive to make wind feasible, and wind is still not feasible, everything else is just ungodly expensive with 5% monthly inflation on food.
Your arguments are not coming from evidence, but from emotions. You clearly want politics as usual, with investments in a very expensive theoretical “one size fits all”, or all eggs in one nest types of solutions. You don’t even list the pros and cons of your statements. This is really bad advising.
Norway has all the power it needs from hydro. But exporting electricity is good, since it will help europeans get off fossil fuels. And the north sea is pretty windy, so it's a good place for windmills [1]. Nuclear would also be good, but unfortunately it's extremely expensive, a lot more expensive than the windmills you seem to hate.
That sounds like a political problem in one country, not a wind problem.
Wind works well, especially offshore: there are 1133 GW of installed wind capacity globally in 2024, so it seems to be working for somebody. This is compared to 377 GW of nuclear globally.