by 
Mastodon
ANSWERS: 14
-
Not likely... They were overlydangerous to the operator and had limited range. Not that they weren't very effective. Grenades are versatile, light, and do the job close enough to the flame thrower to replace it.
-
Not with the current oil prices!
-
I seriously doubt it. A single armor piercing round from a rifle can/will take out the operator in a BIG fireball. I'll say this... I wouldn't want the job of operating one! Napalm bombs dropped from aircraft are much more practical and effective ;-)
-
They are a fearsome weapon. They may be used just for the scare tactics.
-
Only if the battle comes into my front yard!!! Actually the flamethrower will always have its place whereever there is a battle involveing troops who are entrenched deeply It is a ghastly way to empty a trench but it is very effective and will demoralize the enemy more than a bomb....At least that is what I think.
-
phosphorus (wrong spelling i know) gernades replaced them for a while now i never see them coming back unless its for couple rebel civilians
-
No there are better things called Thermobaric weapons.
-
They still may have uses.
-
I wish they were legal for personal use . They have a car alarm in germany that throws flames!
-
I doubt it. They were just as dangerous to the operator and in the mission they were designed for(clearing trenches and taking out bunkers) they've become pretty much obsolete with bunker buster bombs such as the MOAB and the daisy cutter.
-
The use of flamethrowers in todays army have been unilaterally stopped in 1978. The use of flame throwers is not banned by any international treaty, the use of flamethrowers has been questionable for the mere destructive nature of the weapon and the morality of the horrific ways unwhich people are to suffer from burning to death.
-
They are far too gruesome to use in modern warfare. We have like, codes of ethics and stuff... We use napalm now
-
-
Hardcore Conservative Napalm. It sticks to kids.
-
-
I asked this same question to a former green barret, and he said that while we still have them, thye probably wont be used unless there is WW3.
-
They are still in use to clear building and forested areas and are used in chemical warfare scenarios to kill bacteria. they just arent shown as a weapon because of legal reasons
RELATED QUESTIONS
Copyright 2023, Wired Ivy, LLC