>

Sure, time to leave. Set up in the next city and inflict another 10k casualties. At that rate they'll lose a million by the time they reach Kiev
I believe this title is misleading. In the article it states the area is isolated but defense continues and Russia is having difficulty resupplying. It is stated that if a tactical retreat was decided upon it would be under the orders of military leaders not politicians. I saw wording of the battle being in endgame but no admittance of defeat. >

Right.
Ukraine will hold the area until it would be foolish to keep it. You stay to bleed the enemy of troops/ammo/equipment/vehicles/reserves because defending advantage is so massive.
Russia HAS TO attack now before tanks arrive. Goal wise, they have to finish completely recapturing the breakaway regions (ones that held sham referendums) by March (orders from Putin).
If the above happens, Then the Russians will try to negotiate a cease fire while they regroup, reorganize, rearm, and then reattack to finish off Ukraine.
But who knows what will happen. Ukraine has made very few mistakes and try Russians continue to make lots of mistakes. So we will see if Russian waves of manpower can overwhelm Ukrainian performance. >

They've been reorganizing further in the north in the Lyman area. There's talks of offensives coming soon to get ahead of any tank deliveries. >

The article clearly changed the title before publishing, but not the URL.  OP probably auto-created this title from the existing URL when posting, so it is incorrect. >

So the article is about conversations?  And the city is moving somewhere that is nearer to something?  Sounds like somebody is getting paid by the word and has no real information.