All indented paragraphs are excerpts from the article; my responses are bolded.
Podcast host Joe Rogan and standup comedian Duncan Trussell slammed Democrats for abandoning their anti-war beliefs, and praised former President Trump for advocating for peace in Ukraine as the threat of nuclear war looms.
Joe and Duncan, are you currently on a comedy tour? This is laughable. Are you suggesting Democrats have abandoned their anti-war beliefs because they support the war in Ukraine? Are you being serious or just clowning at us? Over the last 50 years, many Democrats have been anti-war with conflicts in Vietnam, the Middle East, and Afghanistan. The zeitgeist in the early 1970s in the US, especially among liberals, was the war in Southeast Asia was amoral; Americans had no business interfering in the dispute between South and North Vietnam. The war in Ukraine is different. Russia attacked Ukraine last year, and NATO is defending the potential land grab by the Russians. NATO members, including the US, think it’s imperative to stop the aggression as it could potentially lead to other invasions in Eastern Europe.
Do Rogan and Trussell think that because Russia has nuclear weapons, they can invade a country without impunity? Can they be the bully on the block against any of their neighbors because they have that ace in the hole?
Joe Rogan spoke on a recent episode of his podcast, The Joe Rogan Experience, about how the anti-war left of his youth has largely disappeared, suggesting Trump is one of the very few leaders trying to bring the Russia-Ukraine conflict to a close.
Joe, you were roughly eight years old when the Vietnam anti-war protests were over…so I’m not sure how many anti-war demonstrations you could recollect from your childhood. Years later, there were anti-war demonstrations against the two Iraqi wars but nothing compared to the Vietnam protests. Same idea regarding Afghanistan; there were some anti-war protests, mostly among the liberals, but nothing compared to the Vietnam War protests. As Mr. Rogen has not articulated in this article, the prime reason for protests in the '60s and early 70s involved a draft, something Mr. Rogen was fortunate not to have experienced. Your framing of anti-war protests of your youth needs much more context and transparency. Are you intentionally trying to be disingenuous?
The podcast host also condemned the "rah-rah aspect" of some politicians' political rhetoric about the Russia-Ukraine war, which he described as a "very complex issue."
Trussell quipped that it is like a "pep rally for murdering people."
According to this article, politicians are engaged in a pep rally regarding Russia's invasion of Ukraine. As you both know, Ukraine is merely defending its sovereign land. They want peace, but it’s natural to defend yourself when you're invaded…If Cuba took over Southern Florida (including Mar a Lago) by an invasion, and Putin said he could stop the war in 24 hours, what would Trump's reaction be?
The “rah-rah aspect” of some politicians’ political rhetoric? Some may just be trying to rally public support supporting Ukraine against Russian aggression.
Rogan then lamented that the anti-war left of his youth is missing in action, saying establishment Democrats and Republicans appear united to prolong the war in Ukraine.
I have to be careful not to put words in the mouth of Joe Rogan. Indeed, like Donald Trump, the number of times his mouth is open would provide ample opportunities. ‘Prolong the war in Ukraine’ means what?
Is he suggesting that both parties want to prolong the war in Ukraine? Look, there are business contractors that deal in the manufacturing and transfers of military equipment; some of those business people think that using military equipment is good for business. I will not address them too much – that’s beside this point.
It’s not exactly true that Republicans and Democrats are united to prolong the war in Ukraine.
According to a poll conducted by The Hill last year, 42 percent of Republicans support the United States providing weapons and financial support to Ukraine. I've read that over 80% of Democrats support Ukraine from the Russian invasion. To say that establishment Democrats and Republicans appear to prolong the war in Ukraine, that's a strong statement without empirical evidence. Mr. Rogen, do additional research before making such a ridiculous and inaccurate statement. Provide your statement with examples.
"They're all united on this idea that they should continue. There's no one, whether it's a Republican or a Democrat," he observed, recalling that Democrats of the past were "always anti-war, always."
He went on to say, "This is the first time where the Democrats are like wholesale buying the narrative and ‘We have to stop Putin. We have to support Ukraine.’ I mean, how many Democrat, peaceful people that used to have syringes in their Twitter bio now have a Ukraine flag?"
Joe, you try to make a point, and your point is a complete exaggeration in the process. Only about 5% of Democrats use Twitter, and many more have a Twitter account, but those individuals are not active on Twitter. Moving on, he mentions replacing the syringes with a Ukrainian flag in their Twitter bio is ridiculous. Please be transparent and honest; many of those who use Twitter are on the extremes of the political spectrum. Saying this claim about one’s Twitter bio might get you clicks (and helps with business) but adds nothing accurate and substantive to the discussion.
Rogan praised Trump for his rhetoric in a CNN Town Hall in May, where the 2024 candidate boasted he could end the Russia-Ukraine war overnight if he were re-elected president.
"If I'm president, I will have that war settled in one day, 24 hours," Trump declared, saying he would meet with presidents of both countries.
Is that the same CNN Town Hall where Trump wouldn’t answer the moderator’s questions directly? The town hall where Trump told many lies? A town hall that included the majority of audience members who were pro-Trump? Considering the venue and participants, it’s hard to seriously gauge that what was said has credence to their cause.
When Trump was asked whether he wants Ukraine or Russia to win the war, he answered, "I want everybody to stop dying. They're dying. Russians and Ukrainians. I want them to stop dying. And I'll have that done. I'll have that done in 24 hours. I'll have it done. You need the power of the presidency to do it."
When was the last time a clear-thinking and honest individual felt like Trump was considered about people's health and well-being?
Rogan appears to support Trump, who says he could end the war in 24 hours. Is that Washington D.C. time or Moscow time? Many Republicans and Democrats want to stop the dying, but the issue is Russia invaded a sovereign (autonomous, free, and independent) nation. Trump does not include this fact in his argument about ending the war in 24 hours. It’s as though he’s positioned to say both countries are at fault here.
Again, I ask, Is Joe Rogan Lacking Critical Thinking Skills? Does Rogan believe Trump could end the war that quickly? Could he persuade Putin to withdraw from Ukraine? What happened to Crimea? Interestingly, none of these "supposed experts" mention Crimea in the discussion. Why hasn’t Trump said it’s Russia’s fault for invading Crimea in 2014 and then invading Ukraine in 2021?
Why does Trump appear unwilling to say anything negative about Putin? What’s going on here?
Some might argue that it was a mistake not to defend Crimea against Russian aggression, and we can’t have this happen again.
Rogan described Trump’s answer as "perfect" and mocked CNN for trying to make a "gotcha" moment "out of a subject that has the fate of the world in front of it," noting the possibility of nuclear war as people are "flippantly supporting this continued conflict with no talk at all about some sort of a compromise."
Why would I want to compromise with the Russians if I were Ukrainian? What historical fact would lead a person to believe the Russian government would be trustworthy with such a compromise? When was the last time Western Nations had concrete proof that Russia could be trusted?
Trussell expressed his shock that Trump’s statement was seen as so controversial, "I always thought that was sort of the general consensus like among people who were sane was it's not good to blow each other up."
He added that even an attempt to end a massive conflict is better than nothing, "You can’t fail worse than war."
"Any attempt at like stopping a war without World War III or violence or whatever, it's glorious," Trussell argued. "Even if it fails, even if it makes you look like a weak pathetic piece of s---, long term, you're going to look great if you were a peacemaker in the world."
Trump contradicts himself every time he opens his mouth. And Trussell suggests that it couldn’t hurt to give Trump a try to end the war. I think, "Why not? It's not as though this is a critical geopolitical issue." Yes, it would be glorious to end the violence in Ukraine. However, most Ukrainians would not give up land for peace. What’s the point of fighting against an invader if you must sacrifice some of your land to ensure peace?