Is helping Ukraine worth risking WW3?
Last Updated: 29.06.2025 01:03
Sending F16s to Ukraine is WW3.
Letting Ukraine fire ATACMS at Russian air bases is patently conclusively unequivocally WW3.
Russia can stop this any time.
Don't miss the half-lit first quarter moon rise tonight — Here's what to look for - Space
Sending Stormshadow/Scalp missiles is WW3.
Thank you.
Please kindly ask Mr Putin to avoid the WW3.
Rory McIlroy makes an 8, barely breaks 80 in missing cut at RBC Canadian Open - NBC Sports
Sending Abrams tanks is absolutely WW3.
Ukraine kicking Russia out of Ukraine is WW3?
Trump approving to kill Soleimani is WW3.
This Everyday Interest Could Reduce Your Risk of Alzheimer’s - SciTechDaily
Letting Ukraine strike targets in Crimea is WW3.
Ukraine’s getting invitation to NATO is WW3?
Any day of the week — including Sundays.
Asian Shares Have Tepid Start Before US Jobs Data: Markets Wrap - Bloomberg
Ukrainians are so tired of hearing all this nonsense.
What’s next?
Sending HIMARS is surely WW3.
Microsoft belatedly attempts to tame USB-C confusion with its rules for PC OEMs - Ars Technica
Ukraine getting Javelins is WW3.
Sending ATACMS is WW3.
Let’s just make it real clear:
Just in the last 5 years:
Ukraine’s incursion into Russia is undeniably WW3.
All they have to do is to withdraw their troops.
Sending MANPADS/ATGMs to Ukraine is undoubtedly 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.
Letting Ukraine strike Russia with their home-made weapons is WW3.
Supplying Ukraine with Tomahawks is WW3? Stationing western troops in Odesa is WW3?
Ukraine refusing to surrender to Russia in February 2022 is WW3.