I have only two words with regards to this holiday season...Bah Humbug. The sooner this Xmas foolishness is over so much the better I feel.

During the course of this week, I took some time to do a little bit of blog hunting and reading, and came across some interesting articles that I thought I would share with the readers.

Apparently, in the Nov. 29, 2004 entry from Baghdad Burning, Riverbend explained that there were rumors of the U.S. using chemical weapons in Fallujah. While I have ready many things on the internet that are pure BS, for laughs and giggles, I decided to take a look around. As with most things these days, I take it for a grain of salt...my cynicism knows no bounds.

Interestingly enough, I did manage to find several postings, while they don not confirm the usage of chemical weapons in Fallujah...there is some interesting speculation, given what I have found.

According to a San Diego Union Tribune article the United States military admitted that in March and April of 2003, while heading to Baghdad, they utilized a bomb know as the Mark 77 Firebomb. Similar to that of the popular napalm during the Vietnam war, the "Mark 77 Firebomb"  use kerosene-based jet fuel, which has a smaller concentration of benzene than that of napalm.

"You can call it something other than napalm, but it's napalm," said John Pike, defense analyst with GlobalSecurity.org, a nonpartisan research group in Alexandria, Va. Firebombs are useful against dug-in troops and light vehicles, said GlobalSecurity's Pike.  Given the resistance that was in Fallujah, using the Mark 77 Firebombs only makes perfect sense.

In a November 28, 2004 the UK's Sunday Mirror, reported that US troops are secretly using outlawed napalm gas to wipe out remaining insurgents in and around Fallujah. Prime Minister Tony Blair was dragged into the row as furious Labour MPs demanded he face the Commons over it. Reports claim that innocent civilians have died in napalm attacks, which turn victims into human fireballs as the gel bonds flames to flesh.

Two weeks ago at a forward base in Kuwait, a handful of soldiers openly challenged Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfield about inadequate about inadequate armor on some vehicles. Rumsfeld cut off their complaints by saying, "You go to war with the Army you have, not the Army you might want or wish to have."

This is indeed true. In the August 7, 2003 edition of the San Diego Union Tribune, a report by staff writer James W. Crawley, stated the Department of Defense  submitted to Congress in February a request for $3.6 million for the Mark 77 Firebomb, six weeks before the war against Iraq when Marine Corps jets dropped dozens of firebombs on Iraqi positions as Marine ground troops advanced on Baghdad.

I should make a special sideline note, that this report is not an attack on the men and women who are serving in our armed forces. Our men and women are obeying orders. I fully support their courage, their sacrifice, their families sacrifice and their commitment to the stabilization efforts.

What I do not support, and what I do question, is our administrations and our governments decision to enter into conflict with Iraq.