Is helping Ukraine worth risking WW3?
Last Updated: 01.07.2025 11:56

Sending ATACMS is WW3.
Ukraine refusing to surrender to Russia in February 2022 is WW3.
Russia can stop this any time.
Elizabeth Warren Pushes Fed to Reinstate Wells Fargo’s Asset Cap - Barron's
Letting Ukraine strike targets in Crimea is WW3.
Ukraine kicking Russia out of Ukraine is WW3?
Please kindly ask Mr Putin to avoid the WW3.
Human-sized Labubu doll sells for more than $150,000 - BBC
Sending F16s to Ukraine is WW3.
Letting Ukraine strike Russia with their home-made weapons is WW3.
“It’s going to be WW3!” is the most notorious notion used by fear-mongers for years.
Simone Biles calls Riley Gaines 'sick' over criticism of transgender athletes - NBC News
Ukraine’s incursion into Russia is undeniably WW3.
Supplying Ukraine with Tomahawks is WW3? Stationing western troops in Odesa is WW3?
Sending Stormshadow/Scalp missiles is WW3.
Ukraine’s getting invitation to NATO is WW3?
All they have to do is to withdraw their troops.
Thank you.
Just in the last 5 years:
Let’s just make it real clear:
Ukraine getting Javelins is WW3.
Trump approving to kill Soleimani is WW3.
Sending HIMARS is surely WW3.
What’s next?
EchoStar Soars 49% As Trump Urges FCC To Settle Dispute - Investor's Business Daily
Sending Abrams tanks is absolutely WW3.
Sending weapons to Ukraine is certainly WW3.
Ukrainians are so tired of hearing all this nonsense.
Will MAGATS boycott Taylor Swift now that she and Travis are supporting Harris?
Letting Ukraine fire ATACMS at Russian air bases is patently conclusively unequivocally WW3.
Any day of the week — including Sundays.
Sending MANPADS/ATGMs to Ukraine is undoubtedly WW3.
Is it safe to take a hot shower after being exposed to extremely low temperatures?