Is helping Ukraine worth risking WW3?
Last Updated: 02.07.2025 13:01

Sending HIMARS is surely 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.
When British people write X after everything, are they being serious or trying not to be awkward?
Letting Ukraine strike targets in Crimea is WW3.
Please kindly ask Mr Putin to avoid the WW3.
Sending ATACMS is WW3.
Gold Holds Decline After US Jobs Data Deters Demand for Havens - Bloomberg
Ukrainians are so tired of hearing all this nonsense.
Let’s just make it real clear:
Trump approving to kill Soleimani is WW3.
US-China trade war sideswipes Europe’s carmakers - politico.eu
Ukraine’s incursion into Russia is undeniably WW3.
Sending Abrams tanks is absolutely WW3.
All they have to do is to withdraw their troops.
Just in the last 5 years:
Ukraine refusing to surrender to Russia in February 2022 is WW3.
Russia can stop this any time.
Ilia Topuria KOs Charles Oliveira in 1st Round at UFC 317 to Win Lightweight Title - Bleacher Report
Sending MANPADS/ATGMs to Ukraine is undoubtedly WW3.
Ukraine getting Javelins is WW3.
Letting Ukraine fire ATACMS at Russian air bases is patently conclusively unequivocally WW3.
Any day of the week — including Sundays.
Sending Stormshadow/Scalp missiles is WW3.
Ukraine kicking Russia out of Ukraine is WW3?
Twins reinstate Byron Buxton from concussion injured list - Sports Illustrated
Sending weapons to Ukraine is certainly WW3.
Ukraine’s getting invitation to NATO is WW3?
Supplying Ukraine with Tomahawks is WW3? Stationing western troops in Odesa is WW3?
Team of the Matchday: Tani carries Minnesota, Joveljić sparks Sporting KC - MLSsoccer.com
What’s next?
Thank you.
Sending F16s to Ukraine is WW3.