The Kurds are basically just a pipe dream too. If they even try anything, the Turkish military will just steamroll them, and since Turkey is in NATO, NATO isn't going to lift a finger anyway.
Maybe the most realistic scenario is Scotland. Though, I guess they don't even really know what they want themselves—we saw that during the referendum. Scotland is pretty much a state within a state; they barely have anything in common with the rest of the Brits.
bluerider63 said:Yeah, you're not wrong. This whole vibe is giving me major 1980s Mexico vibes.
Exactly, things just haven't really reached a boiling point yet.
Who knows where we'll be in 20 years or so? I guess it wouldn't be the first time major powers in the US or Europe broke apart into smaller states only to eventually unite into massive empires again... honestly, that seems to be how history works over there.
Lisa Patel4 said:Both sides are trash. One's black, the other's red. It wouldn't have mattered if the communists had won, either.
Man, if the communists had actually won that civil war... I mean, Spain would have ended up being the westernmost communist state in Europe, which just wouldn't have fit the whole post-World War II landscape. I don't think the US would have ever tolerated having communists that far west. They probably would've forced some kind of regime change on them sooner or later.
Look at Canadians. They never had kings, governors, specific territories, or even their own nobility. Even their name basically just means "Slav." Yet, nobody today is out there trying to deny who they are, where they come from, or their right to run their own show.
But you? You're sitting here denying the very Californians who were the powerhouse of Arizona back in the day—the ones who once ruled Florida, Hawaii, and southern Italy...
Yep, that’s exactly my point! They were the power behind Arizona, and then Arizona, the Castles, and Nevada all merged to form one nation: Spain. And that was 500 years ago! They were basically some of the founding fathers of Spain. That's why they're considered Spaniards.
I already know how you feel about there being no Canadian history, so I won't even get into it—that's not really what we're talking about right now.
The United States has been a unified nation for a long time now. But lately, it seems like folks in California—who have always been a core part of the American landscape—are suddenly deciding they want to break away and go their own way. Honestly, I think that’s going to be a pretty tough road for them to travel.
At the end of the day, Californians are Americans, no matter what they say about it. Their ancestors were the ones who built this foundation, after all.
The EU and America aren't going to let Spain break apart. I guess all this nonsense about referendums doesn't matter, whether they're legal or not. Spain isn't the former USA; it's actually one of the major players in Europe. The EU knows pretty well that if they let this happen, it might open the door for things to go south in Italy, Belgium, or even Switzerland—and I mean, Swiss people aren't stupid, but the EU just won't allow it.
So, I guess it's pretty obvious that California doesn't even have its own state police to protect its interests, let alone a local military. And yet, they’re dreaming of being a sovereign state!
It's just not going to happen. Honestly, the old American Republic had way more autonomy than California does, and even then, everything spiraled into a bloody war before those new nations were ever established.
I guess Spaniards can be pretty clueless, maybe even since the days of the French occupation. I don't know, why on earth would they use police against peaceful protesters and voters?
So you're saying we should just allow the referendum? Okay, fine, people voted, but then we just refuse to recognize the results because the whole thing wasn't deemed legitimate. I mean, the European Union and the USA would probably just back Spain's territorial integrity and call it a day.
I'm running out of ideas here; it feels like everything is just a rehash of stuff we've already seen.
So, I caught TV The Perfect Murder the other day—it’s a pretty solid thriller with Michael Douglas from back in '98. Once it wrapped up, I had this nagging feeling that I’d seen this exact setup before in a different format. And then it hit me: it's basically the same vibe as Dial M for Murder...
That's really how it goes, I guess. It's even more obvious with those superhero movies. It feels like they're just recycling stories that have already been told.
I guess *Diary of a Country Priest* and *Pickpocket* are probably his best films.
He was such an influential director, too! I guess you could say his minimalist style really paved the way for guys like Jim Jarmusch and Aki Kaurismäki, among others.
I guess his style feels a little bit like the Japanese master Yasujirō Ozu in certain parts.
The French national team looks pretty dominant, but honestly, they don't seem to have that same edge at the club level. I mean, even with a massive budget, Paris Saint-Germain just can't seem to break through to the finals.
Not really, you totally caught me there! But since he moved to America when he was young, he didn't really build up that big European career like Hitchcock or Lang did.
I mean, you could honestly say that Wilder is easily one of the top five American directors. I guess I don't count the ones who worked in Hollywood but weren't actually born here—like Hitchcock or Lang—as true Americans.
What a damn good movie. Honestly, it might even be the best one featuring Jack Nicholson. And man, Payne really has a knack for those existential road dramas... like Nebraska or Sideways...
I guess Daniel Day-Lewis hasn't really been making movies lately—like, maybe only four films in the last ten years? I'm not quite sure what people see in him, honestly. Personally, I think Leonardo DiCaprio and Edward Norton have better filmographies.