We have seen that Russia is capable of projecting its Air power into Syria. However, Slavaboos and Muricafags aside, could the Russian military invade Syria sustain a large military presence for years similar to what the US did in Afghanistan and Iraq?
Will bump with Russian military photos in the meantime.
for what purpose
>>29356046
Say Assad loses completely; rebels/ISIS occupies Syria. This goes against Russian interests and thus the Kremlin wants to restore and maintain a puppet government (ie Afghanistan in the 70s).
Sure. It wouldn't be pretty but they have a fairly decent military for a regional power.
It's more a question of funding than capability.
>>29356076
>It wouldn't be pretty
What do you mean by that? Another Chechnya?
Would the Russians suffer alot of casualties and/or just be brutal as fuck?
>>29356111
>Another Chechnya?
more or less
ISIS and other sandmonkeys would bomb Russkies, Russians would respond with war crimes.
They'd take more casualties than NATO in Iraq and Afghanistan, but would probably manage to pacify the region better through violence
In terms of military capability, yes. Syria isn't too far away from Russia so sustaining an occupation wouldn't be difficult. The one headache point would be the Bosphorus Strait if Turkey decided to double down on the shitheadeness but worst case scenario there are alternate supply routes.
Now whether Russia can actually afford a large military presence in Syria for a long period of time is another issue altogether.
>>29356133
>but would probably manage to pacify the region better through violence
they would manage to acquire land that way but not everything on it, those mulsims will just go full gorilla warfare until they go instinct, the only for russia to win syria would keep doing the bombing and sending soldier to the front line with assad's forces and then make syria into a puppet state
>>29356160
>the aircraft and equipment that were in Syria were from Murmansk
>Syria is not that far away from Russia
Does /k/ thinks all equipment is from Novorossiysk or something?
>>29356013
>could Russia occupy a middle eastern country like Afghanistan for a long time
How old are you? Are you aware of history at all? Jesus wept.
>However, Slavaboos and Muricafags aside, could the Russian military invade Syria sustain a large military presence for years similar to what the US did in Afghanistan and Iraq?
No. Look at the budget and what it cost Russia to be deployed in such a small way in Syria for half a year.
>>29356013
>could the Russian military invade Syria sustain a large military presence for years similar to what the US did in Afghanistan and Iraq?
That's not a desirable outcome.
>>29356847
What are you exactly trying to point out here? Are you implying that I don't know that Afghanistan isn't in the Middle East (of which I am aware of) or that Russia/the USSR didn't invade and occupy Afghanistan (which I also am aware of)?
>>29357029
*did occupy and invade Afghanistan
>>29356013
No.
They got out because:
A) They wanted to save face with Turkey.
B) They couldn't stay in Syria for years. They've learned from their Afghani experience.
Sorry, oil is kill and we don't have money
now i must work on xbox x2 time longer becoz ruble is kill
>>29356071
if the legal government collapses then there is no more syria or interests left to preserve. al qaeda will inevitably take over, chaos will spread further into lebanon and jordan, iranians and saudis will go all out into open war, whole region will drown in blood. you don't want to be caught in the middle of that
>>29357038
Did not invade Afghanistan, they came in to support a friendly regime
>>29356013
Largely depends on how capable is the side that rules Syria. If they can organize an effective resistance and prevent Russians from quickly seizing few ports than the Russians would fail. Lack of ground allay is an incredible handicap. Even the US relayed on ground allays in Afghanistan in 2001 and had a large staging area for Iraq in 2003. I doubt that Russia can mount a combined amphibious and air assault that can dislodge an entrenched opponent.
>>29356013
Just in terms of force structure? Nope.
The vast majority of their forces are conscripts on a one-year "get fucked and done" mandatory service. A big part of why the US could do it was that, as an all-volunteer force with minimum service terms of 2 years, though the most common mid-wars was 4-6. And even then it was best to do some combination of re-enlistment or Guard/Reserve out past 8 so you couldn't be called up from Inactive Ready Reserve status, since all US military contracts are for 8 years unless you receive a barred from reentry discharge type.
So, what you have then is Russia invading with a bunch of poorly trained conscripts with indefinite service lengths to maintain a long-term occupation.
>>29356013
No. They will run out of money in a few month. Take a look at their economy.
This>>29359563 and >>29359326
Can't afford professional army because no money and poorly trained conscripts will die in packs just like Assad soldier do now.
>>29359108
>Did not invade Afghanistan, they came in to support a friendly regime
Just like in Hungary 1956 and Czechoslovakia 1968. A friendly regime despised by majority of population. There is a good reason why almost all "traditional" Russian slaves.. allies are allied to US and NATO these days. Russia has never had an ally that isn't dictatorship despised by most of it's population.
>>29359108
>>29359645
http://www.businessinsider.com/astonishing-photos-of-prewar-afghanistan-show-everyday-life-in-peaceful-kabul-2013-2
>>29361160
Afghanistan does not consist of just Kabul.
>>29356013
>could the Russian military invade Syria sustain a large military presence for years similar to what the US did in Afghanistan and Iraq?
It depends on your position about Crimea. If it's not-russian, then yes, they can. There is 28000 soldiers there. If Crimea is Russian, then biggest Russian deployment in is
GEORGIA
7,000; Abkhazia 1 mil base with (1 MR bde; 40 T-90A; 120
BTR-82A; 18 2S3; 12 2S12; 18 BM-21; some S-300 SAM;
some atk hel); South Ossetia 1 mil base with (1 MR bde; 40
T-72; 120 BMP-2; 36 2S3; 12 2S12)
>>29359645
>Just like in Hungary 1956 and Czechoslovakia 1968.
Oh, c'mon. Main Nazi allies rise up against occupation regime - fuck them. Despited by majority of population my ass. Majority of population wished for Drang nach Osten and final solution of the Jewish question.
>>29359620
Oh, "professional" Iraq army trained by best army in the world handled much better, sure. "Poorly trained conscripts" meme was outdated even in Cold war.
>>29356013
no because Russia isn't willing to spend trillions of dollars on a lost cause like iraq or afghanistan, that's why they try to safe syria with limited intervention befoe it's too late
