Is helping Ukraine worth risking WW3?
Last Updated: 26.06.2025 00:30

Letting Ukraine fire ATACMS at Russian air bases is patently conclusively unequivocally WW3.
Sending MANPADS/ATGMs to Ukraine is undoubtedly WW3.
Sending HIMARS is surely WW3.
Let’s just make it real clear:
Ukraine’s incursion into Russia is undeniably WW3.
Letting Ukraine strike targets in Crimea is WW3.
Who is/was the genuinely toughest actor in Hollywood movies?
Ukraine refusing to surrender to Russia in February 2022 is WW3.
Sending weapons to Ukraine is certainly WW3.
Sending Stormshadow/Scalp missiles is WW3.
Please kindly ask Mr Putin to avoid the WW3.
Sending ATACMS is WW3.
What’s next?
The Best Tech Gifts for Father’s Day 2025 - Gizmodo
Letting Ukraine strike Russia with their home-made weapons is WW3.
Ukraine getting Javelins is WW3.
All they have to do is to withdraw their troops.
Can you explain the difference between “mi piace” and “mi piacciono” in Italian?
Just in the last 5 years:
Sending Abrams tanks is absolutely WW3.
“It’s going to be WW3!” is the most notorious notion used by fear-mongers for years.
Ukraine’s getting invitation to NATO is WW3?
Thank you.
Russia can stop this any time.
6 "Bad" Foods that Could Actually Help Lower Blood Pressure, According to Dietitians - EatingWell
Ukraine kicking Russia out of Ukraine is WW3?
Sending F16s to Ukraine is WW3.
Any day of the week — including Sundays.
Did Meghan Markle Use Her College boyfriend For Star Power?
Ukrainians are so tired of hearing all this nonsense.
Supplying Ukraine with Tomahawks is WW3? Stationing western troops in Odesa is WW3?
Trump approving to kill Soleimani is WW3.
Your Apple Watch Is About to Get a Pretty Cool New Ability - Yahoo