Jared Isaacman

Yeah, exactly.

No, because Europe has just no leverage.

There are structural asymmetries to the transatlantic relationships.

Europe remains more dependent on the U.S.

for defense, energy.

You know, they've tried to pivot after pivoting away from Russia.

Technology, operational security, intelligence.

There's no way that, you know, you see a lot of leaders right now, and I think it's so ridiculous hearing someone like

Macron, say, insist on sovereignty and then welcome the W.E.F., welcome more Chinese direct investment because Chinese investment is how you actually decrease your sovereignty.

And and we we've seen that every every everywhere in the world where the Chinese have infiltrated

markets have infiltrated business relationships, government, you know, and by the way, to go back to the Greenland issue, you know, the reason why it's actually very important for the U.S.

to own Greenland is because if Greenland becomes independent, for example, North American security is too precious, is too important to rely on democratic constraints.

I mean,

You know, you have all these like you see this in the U.S.

to local mayors, state governments that can be very easily infiltrated by the Chinese.

What if they go to a mayor in Greenland and say, oh, you know, we would love the rights to this airport.

Will you sell it to us?

What if the Danish government, you know, is run by an Islamist Marxist about 10 years down the road?

And they'd be willing to, you know, basically do China's bidding.

So that is the other reason why it's very important for the United States to actually have control over Greenland.