Vietnam part II?

Early military reports revealed the difficulty that the Soviet forces encountered in fighting in mountainous terrain. The Soviet Army was unfamiliar with such fighting, had no counter-insurgency training, and their weaponry and military equipment, particularly armored cars and tanks, were sometimes ineffective or vulnerable in the mountainous environment. Heavy artillery was extensively used when fighting rebel forces.

The Soviets used helicopters (including Mil Mi-24 Hind helicopter gunships) as their primary air attack force, which was regarded as the most formidable helicopter in the world, supported with fighter-bombers and bombers, ground troops and special forces.

The inability of the Soviet Union to break the military stalemate, gain a significant number of Afghan supporters and affiliates, or to rebuild the Afghan Army, required the increasing direct use of its own forces to fight the rebels. Soviet soldiers often found themselves fighting against civilians due to the elusive tactics of the rebels. They repeated one of the American Vietnam mistakes by winning almost all of the conventional battles, but failing to control the countryside.

**Thanks to Wikipedia for the above info.

Now re-read all of that. But when doing so, replace mountainous with urban, Soviet with American, and Afghan with Iraqi and what does it sound like? Kind of strange what they say, those who ignore history are doomed to repeat it. This would be the second repeat as Russia in Afghanistan was the first.