Is helping Ukraine worth risking WW3?
Last Updated: 25.06.2025 00:14
Letting Ukraine fire ATACMS at Russian air bases is patently conclusively unequivocally WW3.
Ukraine refusing to surrender to Russia in February 2022 is WW3.
Sending weapons to Ukraine is certainly WW3.
China fast tracks rare earth export licences for European companies - Financial Times
Ukraine getting Javelins is WW3.
Ukraine’s incursion into Russia is undeniably WW3.
Any day of the week — including Sundays.
Can landlords or property managers legally offer discounts or incentives for renewing leases?
Please kindly ask Mr Putin to avoid the WW3.
Sending ATACMS is WW3.
Sending HIMARS is surely WW3.
What’s next?
Russia can stop this any time.
All they have to do is to withdraw their troops.
Here are all the former F1 drivers on the 2025 Le Mans 24 Hours Hypercar grid - Motorsport.com
Supplying Ukraine with Tomahawks is WW3? Stationing western troops in Odesa is WW3?
Trump approving to kill Soleimani is WW3.
Sending Abrams tanks is absolutely WW3.
BlackRock removed from Texas blacklist after climate policy rollback - Financial Times
Letting Ukraine strike targets in Crimea is WW3.
Thank you.
Let’s just make it real clear:
Sending F16s to Ukraine is WW3.
“It’s going to be WW3!” is the most notorious notion used by fear-mongers for years.
Sending MANPADS/ATGMs to Ukraine is undoubtedly WW3.
Trump must stop the AI bloodbath before it’s too late - The Hill
Ukraine kicking Russia out of Ukraine is WW3?
Ukrainians are so tired of hearing all this nonsense.
Letting Ukraine strike Russia with their home-made weapons is WW3.
8 Things Knee Doctors Say You Should Never, Ever Do - HuffPost
Sending Stormshadow/Scalp missiles is WW3.
Ukraine’s getting invitation to NATO is WW3?
Just in the last 5 years:
Little-known cells might be key to human brain’s massive memory - The Washington Post