unilaterally pulled out of the cease fire they signed and have been resupplied by Russia. It is amazing how many artillery shells and grad rockets have been fired over the last few months along the whole front. They must be getting resupplied by someone..... who? This in addition to new trucks, tanks, artillery systems and you are seeing brand new winter uniforms and colds weather gear. They also seem to have new Russian military rations. Must be part of the "humanitarian aid".

... to explain to you why this is just peachy keen.

they also go away when I provide the proof of the unilaterally pulling out of the cease fire they signed.

Of course things fell apart.

The legislature officially approved the offensives January 15th and within a week lo and behold we had fighting, imagine that.

The truce never really held, basically because while Europe seemed to want it, the US was sending mixed messages and Kiev has continued to hope to bring America in.

Remember the current administration in Kiev are Right Wing Nationalists. Most of us understand that those kinds of people always look at war and hate as answers. Just like neocons here, warhawks only lay off if they get pressure.

only one unilaterally pulled out and actually stated and offensive and gained ground. That is the "pro-Russians". They did not even send anybody to the last Minsk meeting that had any power to negotiate a cease fire, Ukraine did though. They have started an offensive along the entire front. Now they all have nice new winter uniforms and coats. They have an unlimited supply of munitions. They are getting new trucks and tanks. They have Russian military rations. Where is this coming from? Could it be RUSSIA from the unmonitored border?

It is time you agreed to a ceasefire in place. It is past time you did so. There will be plenty of opportunities to shift the final line of occupation later during negotiations. Just stop the war now, stop it before it's too late.

And Ukraine should just roll over and "shift the line of occupation."

Every life lost, every person displaced, is a tragedy.

Should we send a dozen NATO divisions with full air and naval support? Should we start a World War and then nuke each other to total oblivion? That is want the rationale of our intervening militarily in Ukraine would logically lead to.

1. enforce the border with international observers that are not a party to the conflict.

2. establish the September line of contact and require both sides to pull back heavy arms.

You don't see any potential for trouble there? Will we also close Ukraine's other borders, to prevent western weapons from flowing in? I assume you see the need that weapons for both sides be kept out?

As to your second point: Where the final line of authority between Kiev and the Separatist Republics is drawn is a matter for negotiations. To insist that the September ceasefire line (which was never enforced or complied with by Kiev) is the only option now for a ceasefire is merely to insure the fighting will go on indefinitely.

So only Russia can be trusted, give me a break. Yes, those western weapons are just flooding in . That is quite unlike how now the pro-Russians have more weapons and munitions than Ukraine started out with. I wonder how that happened?

There is a slight difference as Ukraine is a sovereign state and the pro-Russians do not have a sovereign state and are part of Ukraine and in the past even agreed to remain a part of Ukraine.

Yes, I think they might see that as hostile indeed.

A ceasefire needs to be negotiated first. Afterward it will be time to arrange for an arms embargo on all Ukrainian factions.

When the Separatists agreed to remain part of Ukraine it was before fifty thousand had died and the central government had turned their cities into wastelands; at any rate, the establishment of autonomous rights for the Separatists is another matter for negotiations. One thing is certain, however, the longer this fighting and dying goes on, the less likely Ukraine will emerge from it's civil war a united whole.

as part of the prior negotiations. Why would the "pro-Russians" think border monitoring would be a hostile act if they have nothing to hide. Maybe the fact that there arms and equipment would be interrupted from mother Russia? No one said seal the borders, monitor them by parties not involved in the conflict.

Should the "pro-Russians be shelling Debaltseve and Mariupol? Oh that's right, you stated that was a false flag operation and Ukraine was shelling themselves.

That is what I wrote an OP in regard to. Don't distort my words to try and prove some unrelated point of your own.

See you around, Duck.

I am for a complete arms embargo on both sides in the civil war. As long as both sides are treated equally, Russia should have no reason to complain.

when the "pro-Russian' side unilaterally pulled out of the last one, attacked along the entire front gaining ground and refuses to send anyone with any power to Minsk to negotiate? At least Ukraine did.

We don't have a time machine to take everyone back to last September, so that the initial ceasefire can be enforced and made to work. Now is now, and the fighting has to end now.

why if he is gaining ground would he do it?
So how do you stop it?

The Russian President doesn't command any of the forces currently engaged in the fighting, so I just don't see how he could do what you suggest. He can, however, use his influence with the ethnic Russian Separatists to get them to agree to a ceasefire.

Might it not be an equally good idea for us to use our influence with Kiev to convince them a military victory is unattainable and that they should reach a peaceful accommodation with the Separatists in open negotiation?

quite unlike the "pro-Russians"

Kind of hard to negotiate when only one side shows up.

Representatives of the Separatist Republics did go to Minsk, and Kiev's representative refused to negotiate with them (claiming they were not of sufficiently high authority to accept Kiev's terms). That is not at all the same as "Only one side" showing up.

on 31 January 2015

Because they did. The Western side merely insisted they were not senior enough to negotiate with, and then called off the talks.

Looks to me like one side still thinks it can win a military victory. I just wonder how many more will have to die before they change their minds (and we stop encouraging them to fight on).

that is not what the statement said.

They did attend the original Minsk meeting in September and did sign the initial ceasefire agreement (which Kiev failed to make its forces comply with). The Republics sent lower level representatives to the more recent Minsk meeting, which decision Kiev and its western backers used as an excuse to call off the talks.

You can look that up on Google, just like I did for this:

http://en.belapan.com/archive/2015/01/16/en_media_separatisty_v/

supplied with troops, equipment and munitions from Russia.

That is why they will not negotiate a cease fire and unilaterally pulled out of the last cease fire they signed.

God created the atom so that all men may be cremated equally.

Attacking things like Armored columns and Aircraft is morally different than bombing villages in Iraq. With the Drones we can have plasable deniability on even being there.

Both sides use the same "Russian" designed equipment. Are you expecting any Russian tank crews (if there even are such in Ukraine) to fly their national flag from the turrets of their vehicles?