Why aren't flamethrowers used anymore?

>>31966037
Could have Googled this, faggot.
After the Vietnam War finished, most army use of flamethrowers was stopped by the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons (concluded at Geneva on 10 October 1980 and entered into force in December 1983). See the Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use of Incendiary Weapons (Protocol III), which the United States ratified on 23 December 2008.[27]

File: 1261433292053.jpg (31KB, 591x444px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 591x444px

>>31966037
'Cause they're banned by the Geneva protocol for causing undue suffering.

Also, if the enemy catches you with a flamethrower, they'll gouge out your eyes, cut off your hands and split your dick.

>>31966037
Very short range
Not much "ammo"
Difficult to operate safely
Grenade launchers are overall better
Charred corpses smell funny
Muh feelings

>>31966062
>>31966069
You know i was going to say this too, but then i got to thinking.

America doesn't give a shit about international law, they are always reserving a right to decline to follow it, as does Russia.

So there's got to be a FURTHER reason, something else doing the job better so that the US and Russia don't think it's necessary to go 'no fuck you we're keeping our flamethrowers'.

>>31966037
because you cant tunnel in sand

if it was a good way of removing kebab, we'd be doing it

>>31966062
>>31966069

did you even read the convention faggots, it only prohibits incendiary use on civilians

>>31966097
>Everything is designed solely to remove kebab
We might want to kill people who aren't kebab. I'm pretty sure there's more to it than 'don't need it for kebab'.

>>31966092
Thermobaric grenades are a thing

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=KQ1Remb1rz0

>>31966037
Because you don't want to become a living bomb for everyone around because someone got a lucky shot on you. Also
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RPO-A_Shmel

Will definitely see their use reinstated for building clearing come next big war. The ban is only for use on civilians.

Curious what a modern metropolitan area would look like under siege.

>>31966144
>believing the explosing flamethrower meme

File: Laughig while reading Dzenevskaja conventions.jpg (35KB, 500x325px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 500x325px

Thermobarics are a direct update.

>>31966037
for incredible and unjustifiable cruelty

>>31966037
Russia uses more efficient thermobarics on a fairly regular basis. The USA has mostly been paranoid about how the media will view any war post-Vietnam and anyway flamethrowers are bad for hearts and minds. Remaining states of note follow the same thought processes with the obvious exception of crazies like Iraq (pre-2003), North Korea and Iran. Basically there are better options if you want to burn fuckers and burning fuckers is bad publicity.

because if you shoot flame dude all his dudes get blowed up dipskit

>>31966069
Not banned for usage against enemy combatants.

See our usage of incendiary weapons (such as the Mk72) in Iraq.