Is helping Ukraine worth risking WW3?
Last Updated: 02.07.2025 00:36

Sending Abrams tanks is absolutely WW3.
Any day of the week — including Sundays.
“It’s going to be WW3!” is the most notorious notion used by fear-mongers for years.
Third case of bird flu detected at commercial farm in Maricopa County - ABC15 Arizona
Letting Ukraine fire ATACMS at Russian air bases is patently conclusively unequivocally WW3.
Thank you.
All they have to do is to withdraw their troops.
Sending MANPADS/ATGMs to Ukraine is undoubtedly WW3.
Ukraine getting Javelins is WW3.
Letting Ukraine strike targets in Crimea is WW3.
Just in the last 5 years:
Ukraine’s getting invitation to NATO is WW3?
Let’s just make it real clear:
iOS 26 beta 2 adds brand new iPhone ringtone, listen here - 9to5Mac
Letting Ukraine strike Russia with their home-made weapons is WW3.
Sending ATACMS is WW3.
Sending HIMARS is surely WW3.
Ukraine refusing to surrender to Russia in February 2022 is WW3.
Ukraine kicking Russia out of Ukraine is WW3?
What’s next?
Brain ‘Reset Wave’ May Explain How ECT Rapidly Relieves Depression - Neuroscience News
Sending F16s to Ukraine is WW3.
Ukraine’s incursion into Russia is undeniably WW3.
Trump approving to kill Soleimani is WW3.
Apple’s 2024 M4 MacBook Pro with a 1TB SSD has never been this cheap - The Verge
Sending weapons to Ukraine is certainly WW3.
Russia can stop this any time.
Please kindly ask Mr Putin to avoid the WW3.
Ukrainians are so tired of hearing all this nonsense.
Supplying Ukraine with Tomahawks is WW3? Stationing western troops in Odesa is WW3?
Sending Stormshadow/Scalp missiles is WW3.
Chip Supplier Wolfspeed Agrees to Cut $4.6 Billion Debt in Bankruptcy - WSJ