Setting the training centers doesn't risk WW3; hitting them would.
Undoing the Dnieper bridges had not to be done: it would have risked WW3. Using a "peace contingent" to occupy as far East as the Dnieper? That may well be done; why? Because it doesn't risk sparking WW3.
:)
Setting the training centers doesn't risk WW3; hitting them would.
Undoing the Dnieper bridges had not to be done: it would have risked WW3. Using a "peace contingent" to occupy as far East as the Dnieper? That may well be done; why? Because it doesn't risk sparking WW3.
Setting the training centers doesn't risk WW3; hitting them would.
Undoing the Dnieper bridges had not to be done: it would have risked WW3. Using a "peace contingent" to occupy as far East as the Dnieper? That may well be done; why? Because it doesn't risk sparking WW3.
:)
The term "WW3" is vacuous.