[Goose]

So far, Ukrainians have not defended to futility, so I don't expect them to do so this time.  

Perhaps Mariupol is an example of a defense that went on too long?  Depending on who you believe Ukraine lost around 1000 prisoners, with some eventually being returned.

Holding Mariupol that long kept the M14 closed and the Russian land bridge was therefore not operational. Even when the defenders were constricted into just the steel plant they had fire control of the road. The siege also occupied a disproportionate number of Russian assets.  Both effects were extremely important during that period because Russia couldn't shuttle troops and supplies from north to south when necessary. The defense had immense strategic implications. That is why Ukraine accepted the losses. They needed time to reorganize, refit, and recover from what was going on. Mariupol bought them that time. They knew full well the price and paid it. Bakhmut itself doesn't have any where near as much strategic significance.

[Goose]

So far, Ukrainians have not defended to futility, so I don't expect them to do so this time.  

Perhaps Mariupol is an example of a defense that went on too long?  Depending on who you believe Ukraine lost around 1000 prisoners, with some eventually being returned.

Holding Mariupol that long kept the M14 closed and the Russian land bridge was therefore not operational. Even when the defenders were constricted into just the steel plant they had fire control of the road. The siege also occupied a disproportionate number of Russian assets.  Both effects were extremely important during that period because Russia couldn't shuttle troops and supplies from north to south when necessary. The defense had immense strategic implications. That is why Ukraine accepted the losses. They needed time to reorganize, refit, and recover from what was going on. Mariupol bought them that time. They knew full well the price and paid it. Bakhmut itself doesn't have any where near as much strategic significance.