Is helping Ukraine worth risking WW3?
Last Updated: 01.07.2025 19:29

Supplying Ukraine with Tomahawks is WW3? Stationing western troops in Odesa is WW3?
Sending F16s to Ukraine is WW3.
Sending ATACMS is WW3.
Ukraine’s incursion into Russia is undeniably WW3.
Trump approving to kill Soleimani is WW3.
Ukraine’s getting invitation to NATO is WW3?
AI identifies key gene sets that cause complex diseases - Medical Xpress
Please kindly ask Mr Putin to avoid the WW3.
Letting Ukraine strike targets in Crimea is WW3.
Russia can stop this any time.
5 tiny habits that can significantly improve heart health, backed by science - Times of India
Sending HIMARS is surely WW3.
All they have to do is to withdraw their troops.
Sending Abrams tanks is absolutely WW3.
Here come the glassholes, part II - Financial Times
Sending weapons to Ukraine is certainly WW3.
“It’s going to be WW3!” is the most notorious notion used by fear-mongers for years.
Sending Stormshadow/Scalp missiles is WW3.
Just in the last 5 years:
Any day of the week — including Sundays.
Letting Ukraine strike Russia with their home-made weapons is WW3.
How airline fees have turned baggage into billions - BBC
Ukrainians are so tired of hearing all this nonsense.
Letting Ukraine fire ATACMS at Russian air bases is patently conclusively unequivocally WW3.
Sending MANPADS/ATGMs to Ukraine is undoubtedly WW3.
Thank you.
Let’s just make it real clear:
Ukraine refusing to surrender to Russia in February 2022 is WW3.
What are some K-Pop group names that sounds pretty?
What’s next?
Ukraine getting Javelins is WW3.
Ukraine kicking Russia out of Ukraine is WW3?
2025 NFL All-Paid Team: Saquon Barkley, Dak Prescott headline top earners by position - NFL.com