Is helping Ukraine worth risking WW3?
Last Updated: 30.06.2025 00:55

Ukraine refusing to surrender to Russia in February 2022 is WW3.
Sending Abrams tanks is absolutely WW3.
Ukraine’s getting invitation to NATO is WW3?
This nonhormonal hot-flash remedy gives options to women, experts say - The Washington Post
Letting Ukraine strike Russia with their home-made weapons is WW3.
Sending Stormshadow/Scalp missiles is WW3.
All they have to do is to withdraw their troops.
What’s next?
Letting Ukraine fire ATACMS at Russian air bases is patently conclusively unequivocally WW3.
Just in the last 5 years:
Here’s why exercise is so important if you’re a cancer survivor - The Washington Post
Sending F16s to Ukraine is WW3.
Russia can stop this any time.
Please kindly ask Mr Putin to avoid the WW3.
Why do men love to stink/being smelly?
Letting Ukraine strike targets in Crimea is WW3.
Ukraine getting Javelins is WW3.
Ukrainians are so tired of hearing all this nonsense.
Column | How many years do I have left? An app gave me some helpful insights. - The Washington Post
Let’s just make it real clear:
Ukraine kicking Russia out of Ukraine is WW3?
Sending HIMARS is surely WW3.
How could Trump, with his deplorable garbage supporters, manage to win an election?
Supplying Ukraine with Tomahawks is WW3? Stationing western troops in Odesa is WW3?
Any day of the week — including Sundays.
Ukraine’s incursion into Russia is undeniably WW3.
Exclusive Trump interview: A big steel deal for Pennsylvania - Washington Examiner
Thank you.
Sending ATACMS is WW3.
Sending MANPADS/ATGMs to Ukraine is undoubtedly WW3.
Trump approving to kill Soleimani is WW3.
Sending weapons to Ukraine is certainly WW3.
“It’s going to be WW3!” is the most notorious notion used by fear-mongers for years.
Israel says it killed 9 Iranian nuclear scientists, and braces for attacks from Iran - NPR