Russia - threadbanned users in OP

there are satellite picks of where they store artillery and tanks in Russia, so over time whats taken out can be counted , it was pointed out that they seemed to be picking apart some of the arty for barrels, I doubt they have an absolute shortage of arty/shells, just more a logistics issue of having them in the right place. but that affects both sides, its all react, counter react, counter counter react.

And in the hands of terrorist groups.

Well no that's what the Ukrainians have christened them.

It is hilarious how that term does rattle certain peoples Jimmies though.

When the Nazi's were invading Europe, we referred to them with derogatory terms. Not every German soldier was "evil" of course, but they were taking part in a greater evil.

Putin is currently invading a European country (and is indirectly on a war footing with the rest of Europe) and as such Russians are being referring to by various terms. The Ukrainians started referring to invading Russian soldiers as "orcs" because they were systematically destroying, stealing, raping, murdering - similar to the fictional characters.

You post a story about a Russian soldier who doesn't want to fight, okay, I can post details of Russian soldiers keeping girls as young as 14 in a basement for a month systematically raping them. Russian soldiers castrating Ukrainian POWs. Torturing kids in Kherson. Pulling people's teeth out in Bucha. Deliberately opening fire on pensioners in a car in the outskirts of Kyiv. Deliberately targeting residential buildings, hospitals. Not isolated incidents, thousands upon thousands of cases have been recorded.

I don't use the term "orc" myself, but I understand why some do. In context, a European country is being invaded, people are being slaughtered.

To be fair in every war both armies would have names for their enemies. Might not hear commanders or leaders calling them it but definitely troops on the ground. If Ukraine call Russian's orcs are the Russians using the term nazis for Ukraine or do they have another name they call them that their troops use?

So by the your and CHBS's logic the Times newspaper are Russian Sympathisers ? More likely they hold views similar to mine, that Ukraine has been illegally invaded and the operation to liberate it is resulting in human suffering on both sides of the conflict. 

In truth I held similar opinions to you and CHBS when I was young, happy to tarnish an entire nation because of the views and actions of their leadership. This was further ingrained when I was detained and questioned by Bulgarian military police in the early 80s, however on the same trip I met lots of locals who became friends. Talking to me in private, often in whispers, I soon understood the hardships they faced under their feared communist leadership and realised many good people exit in "bad" countries.

CHBS says that it would be so easy for Taktashov to desert:

"he could have surrendered at any point like thousands of his countrymen have done, there is well known and advertised “I want to live” campaign targeted at Russian soldiers. There are even bounties if they do so with equipment."

Unfortunately this is huge simplification and incorrect. Taktashov was attached to the 70th regiment, which had a history of recruits surrendering, so it was stuffed full of FSB informants to counter any attempts driven by freewill. 

Ukrainians themselves don't share many of the hardliner views expressed here on boards, most have family in Russia, and are happy to be vocal about the human tragedy on both sides of this conflict, I guess the Ukrainian who wrote this article on life in the Russian 70th regiment is also a Russian sympathizer: 

https://myukraineis.org/news/several_units_of_the_70th_motorized_rifle_regiment_of_the_russian_federation_openly_refused_to_take_part_in_the_war_intelligence-331.html

Nail on the head. It also why even Russians living abroad are very reluctant to criticize or protest against Putin or his regime.

Huh? I haven't tarnished any nation. 😂

It's your "logic" not mine you are bemoaning the fact you are being called a Russian sympathiser whilst again openly calling for sympathy for dead Russian soldiers.

Well.....is there truth in this or did someone jump the gun?

Sky News also reports something similar.

One common thread in the video interviews of Russian POWs has been surprise at how well they've been treated. We've also seen videos of injured Russian soldiers taking their own lives to avoid capture.

Russian troops are fed a lot of propoganda about the treatment they can expect to receive from the Ukrainian armed forces if they surrender and when we've all heard about the brutality inflicted upon captured Ukrainian troops (and civilians) from the comfort our our homes in Ireland, you can be sure they've not only heard those stories but likely heard (or seen) far more of it.

If you were stuck on the frontlines and knew your side were raping, castrating, flaying and otherwise brutalising POWs, and were being told that's the kind of treatment you can expect if you're captured or surrender, it's entirely understandable that you might decide it's better to stay where you are and take your chances of a relatively quick and clean death from a bullet or artillery strike.

I don't think it's a contradiction to feel some degree of sympathy for those conscripted into the Russian army against their will while at the same time hoping Ukraine can kill as many of them as they need to in order to regain control of their land. Yes, in an ideal world a surgical strike against the Russian leadership responsible for starting the invasion (and continuing to fight in Ukraine long after it's become clear that they've lost) would be the best outcome but rather tragically for the conscripts forced to be there (and the Ukrainians their army are murdering, torturing and raping), such things are a lot easier said than done and this isn't a conflict that can be resolved by negotiations (because that same leadership don't negotiate in good faith).

Personally I dont think the lines are going to move much by the autumn and on that basis the offensive will have been a failure. What's plan B? I doubt Biden want this conflict rolling into election season if its going badly? would negotiation sooner rather than later result in any difference?

I have no wish to play word games with you or dilute this thread. I have one opinion, the invasion is illegal and the war causes a tragic loss of human life on both sides, you have another opinion.

Highlighted is the red flag. Ukraine is being invaded by Russia. They have no choice in that, however they do have a choice between accepting occupation or defending themselves. They've overwhelmingly chosen to defend themselves.

They've also chose to ask for support in this. Other countries are supporting them, which is perfectly legal.

The Ukrainians are more than aware of the pain and suffering caused by defending themselves from occupation. That's the price they are willing to pay. That is the choice they made. Likewise it is their choice if/when they decide they will go to the negotiating table.

You are attempting to speak on their behalf.

There it is again. Both-sides-ism.

It's up to Ukrainians how they face this, all we can do is support them when they ask for it (otherwise we are enabling the invaders).

The language you are using here is reminiscent of those individuals who support rewarding Putin with land for the sake of a temporary "peace" (brutal occupation), who think they know what is best for the Ukrainian people.

I haven't given my opinion.

But no I wouldn't be distressed or sad by Ukrainian's killing Russians in the literal name of freedom.

The only good Russian in Ukraine is a dead one, however they ended up there.

I see the Russian Soldiers that are alive committing the torture, killing and raping children as the tragedy.

Again though if you are going to try and garner sympathy for Russians being killed slaughtering Ukrainians don't cry wambulance when people call you out on it.