Is helping Ukraine worth risking WW3?
Last Updated: 26.06.2025 04:51
Letting Ukraine fire ATACMS at Russian air bases is patently conclusively unequivocally WW3.
Russia can stop this any time.
Let’s just make it real clear:
“It’s going to be WW3!” is the most notorious notion used by fear-mongers for years.
Just in the last 5 years:
Sending Abrams tanks is absolutely WW3.
The Outer Worlds 2 Feels Like More Of The Same, And That's Okay - GameSpot
Ukraine’s incursion into Russia is undeniably WW3.
Ukraine kicking Russia out of Ukraine is WW3?
Sending F16s to Ukraine is WW3.
Do you want to have an XXX chat?
Sending MANPADS/ATGMs to Ukraine is undoubtedly WW3.
All they have to do is to withdraw their troops.
Sending HIMARS is surely WW3.
Reds Designate Jeimer Candelario For Assignment - MLB Trade Rumors
What’s next?
Ukraine’s getting invitation to NATO is WW3?
Sending weapons to Ukraine is certainly WW3.
Scoop: Every Senate Dem demands Trump withdraw military from Los Angeles - Axios
Thank you.
Letting Ukraine strike Russia with their home-made weapons is WW3.
Please kindly ask Mr Putin to avoid the WW3.
How do you handle your mother-in-law after you heard her talking badly about you in the next room?
Sending Stormshadow/Scalp missiles is WW3.
Letting Ukraine strike targets in Crimea is WW3.
Supplying Ukraine with Tomahawks is WW3? Stationing western troops in Odesa is WW3?
Ukraine getting Javelins is WW3.
Sending ATACMS is WW3.
Ukrainians are so tired of hearing all this nonsense.
Trump approving to kill Soleimani is WW3.
Ukraine refusing to surrender to Russia in February 2022 is WW3.
Any day of the week — including Sundays.
Musk rails against Trump tax bill, calling it ‘a disgusting abomination’ - The Washington Post