“Sustain” is a really funky term that’s hard to define. Like, they can keep refurbing tanks. They can keep funneling out meat. But they can’t replace the ships. They can’t replace the sovereign wealth fund.

Not to say the US shouldn’t be sending every last bomb it can find

That is something I heard ... since the beginning of the war, yet I see no signs of it. Russias economy is in full war mode, producing way more tanks and shells than the west. Ukraine has serious ammunition and manpower problems and the front can collapse. Also Ukraine prepared for a succesful offensive, and neglected the defense.

"It’s a really small place with minor strategic value"

And that small place was one of the best fortified places and succesfully defended since 2014. The fallback positions are not nearly as good prepared. And the chances are low, that they can even fallback with no more roads under their control. It is really not looking good at the moment.

The rest of the post is fiction

That is effectivly the same. They can bring more tanks (100+ every month according to british intelligence) in, than they loose. Not the case for Ukraine.

And if you mind telling me, what of my post was fiction in your perception, I might consider giving you sources.

Now they try to fall back through the mud.

Some dark highlights:

"The second line of defense, a few kilometers behind the front, is still being built, according to nearly a dozen interviewed soldiers."

"To reinforce infantry units after heavy losses, Ukraine has transferred soldiers from units specialized in artillery or logistics to infantry positions, according to the soldiers interviewed by the Kyiv Independent. This means soldiers deployed on the first defensive line may not even know the basic survival skills of an infantryman"

The withdrawal is already complete. It went pretty well.

https://kyivindependent.com/avdiivka-defense-uncertain-as-uk...

Because I did not made up anything, you can claim that the Kyivindependent did, but they are probably closer to the events than you.

"The withdrawal is already complete. It went pretty well. "

Information is still chaotic, but apparently they left the injured and many men and equipment behind. Not my definition of "pretty well".

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/02/17/world/europe/ukraine-avdi...

The institute of war daily updates is the only source I care to trust. News media is often hyperbolic in both directions.

"Ukrainian forces will likely be able to establish new defensive lines not far beyond Avdiivka, which will likely prompt the culmination of the Russian offensive in this area. "

If there would have been a second line truly ready and prepared, there would be no need to write it this way.

And all they wrote about the retreat, is that they have not seen pictures of large groups of ukrainians surrender. They do not deny, that the order came to leave the wounded behind. Or that lots of equipment had to be left behind. They just do not mention it. But they do not wrote the retreat went pretty well, like you did.

"Russian forces have not yet demonstrated an ability to secure operationally significant gains or conduct rapid mechanized maneuver across large swaths of territory"

And this is correct - but they are aware and state the possibility, that the front can collapse.

the question is who will starve faster: Ukraine or Russia.

I don't see much signs of starving from Russian side at the same time.