What choice is there in war? If Relic wanted to portray the grit of the Soviet soldier, why insert this line and ruin Soldier 1's bravery? By inserting this line, Relic is instead downplaying Soldier 1's bravery.
And on top of that, why did the commissar execute the stranger behind Isakovich, which prompted him to remark on the enemy saving bullets in the first place? Heavily implied to be under charges of cowardice.
In CoH1, Americans and British bravely fought on foreign soil for strangers, but Soviets in Stalingrad were driven not by home, friends, family, or revenge, but Order 227 and a fear of death.
When the maximum length of servitude was 3 months and many returned to their units afterwards. Why many didn't survive the war is because Penal Battalions were overwhelmingly early-mid war formations when the Soviets were still struggling. You might as well say that joining any Soviet military unit in the years of 1941-1943 is a death sentence. Very few enlisted men from 1941 survived too.
EDIT: Quinn Duffy and his team has tried to paint the Russians in the worst light possible. If you insist the game is 'historically balanced' as he calls it, we'll just have to agree to disagree. I'm extremely happy that Quinn Duffy has left. CoH3 will be better without petty politics and disrespectful slander.
Once more I am not trying to defend Relic, Quinn Duffy or anyone else.
Imo none of what you have pointed out depicts the Soviet solider as a coward.
Cowards do not fight and in the game Russian soldier fight even against impossible odds.
Imo criticism (weather justified or not or even accurate is another story) aim at the high command and not at the foot soldiers.