Is helping Ukraine worth risking WW3?
Last Updated: 01.07.2025 04:49

Ukrainians are so tired of hearing all this nonsense.
Thank you.
Sending Abrams tanks is absolutely WW3.
Reports: Bills RB James Cook ‘won’t be in Buffalo anytime soon’ - Buffalo Rumblings
Letting Ukraine strike targets in Crimea is WW3.
“It’s going to be WW3!” is the most notorious notion used by fear-mongers for years.
Letting Ukraine fire ATACMS at Russian air bases is patently conclusively unequivocally WW3.
You can try Windows 11's newest Start menu now - here's how - ZDNET
Russia can stop this any time.
Sending Stormshadow/Scalp missiles is WW3.
Sending F16s to Ukraine is WW3.
Any day of the week — including Sundays.
What’s next?
Ukraine’s incursion into Russia is undeniably WW3.
Ukraine getting Javelins is WW3.
Sending HIMARS is surely WW3.
All they have to do is to withdraw their troops.
Why Stocks Are up and Oil Is Down As the US and Iran Trade Strikes - Business Insider
Sending weapons to Ukraine is certainly WW3.
Ukraine kicking Russia out of Ukraine is WW3?
Trump approving to kill Soleimani is WW3.
The mystery rise of lung cancer in non-smokers - BBC
Ukraine refusing to surrender to Russia in February 2022 is WW3.
Ukraine’s getting invitation to NATO is WW3?
Letting Ukraine strike Russia with their home-made weapons is WW3.
What is the Abu Shusha massacre in Palestine?
Let’s just make it real clear:
Sending MANPADS/ATGMs to Ukraine is undoubtedly WW3.
Supplying Ukraine with Tomahawks is WW3? Stationing western troops in Odesa is WW3?
Just in the last 5 years:
Sending ATACMS is WW3.
Please kindly ask Mr Putin to avoid the WW3.