The Ukrainian Government is massacring civilians and needs to be stopped

I would like to sincerely apologize for not giving this debate more of my attention. With 3 mafia forum games going on, a tournament I am running, and several other active debates I am contesting, I have been pressed for time. I thank my opponent once again for this debate, and hope make up for my previous lack of involvement this round. DEFINITIONS My opponent does not contest my definitions. Thus, we can extend that "Evil" is "the absence or complete opposite of that which is ascribed as being good," and that "Fascism" refers to a specific ideology of authoritarian leadership, racial conflict, ultranationalism, and autarky, and that "Atrocious" means "extremely wicked, brutal, or cruel: barbaric." BURDENS Pro also does not contest that he bears the sole BOP in this debate, and must prove five things to win: that the government in Kiev (1) is corrupt, (2) is evil, (3) is fascist, (4) is massacring civilians, and (5) needs to stop massacring civilians. If Pro fails to show any one of these, he has lost. REBUTTALS P1: Preemptive Warning The warning came prior to a planned, long-term assault. Sure, the war may have been in this area before, but unless Pro can show that Ukraine failed to warn civilians when major military offense were occurring in those regions, he cannot substantiate his arguments. If Kiev does warn people in advance of such planned operations, as this example seems to imply, it is certainly not the villain Pro makes it out to be. P2: Human Shields + Prolonged Conflict Whether or not the strategy has worked, keeping military installations or troops near civilian locations does use civilians as human shields and places them in harms way. It is therefore not the fault of the Ukrainian government when civilians are hurt, because it is the separatist that have chosen to fight close to civilian areas. As for the idea that the separatists haven't encroached into Ukrainian land--that is patently false. All land held by the separatists is legally part of Ukraine. Thus, all the land the separatists occupy has been encroached upon. But Pro's points are non-responsive to mine. If Ukraine doesn't take the fight to the separatists, the separatists will take the fight to Ukraine. [2] Finally, again, some collateral damage is to be expected, and Con seems to agree with this. However, he says that more than some collateral damage has occurred. Unfortunately, his source, the NY Times, does not say who is responsible for all or most of those deaths and injuries. We just don't know how many are attributable to Kiev. Additionally, that NY Times article suggests that the harm to civilians has been caused by aging weaponry. So, it is safe to assume that if Kiev could minimize harms to civilians with more precise weapons, it would do so. And Ukraine is doing a lot to allow civilians to escape. Its "armed forces will do what they can to provide transportation for citizens wishing to flee." [see my 4th source from last round] P3: Sources The rebels do, in fact, have grad rockets, so it's not the only logical explanation that Kiev is at fault. [1] The rebels are largely bankrolled by the Russians, and actual have better technology than Kiev. So, if, as Pro suggests, "It is much more likely for a professional, government-funded military to have such technology," it is more likely than not that the separatists have the better armament due to Moscow's support. The cite that Pro is talking about doesn't provide any evidence to back up its claims and makes a ton of bare assertions. Just because it says a killing was carried out by Poroshenko doesn't mean it was--where is the evidence?! None is provided. I will address everything else and conclude next round. 1 - http://www.nytimes.com... 2 - http://www.usatoday.com...