WHY THE FUCK DON'T WE USE THESE ANYMORE?!

>>33694482

Have you seen the price of gas?

>>33694482
Muh human right violations

>>33694482

Apparently you're not supposed to burn down villages just because they're harboring 40 terrorists. I keep hearing that thermobaric weapons have replaced them, but when was the last time we used those either?

>>33694482
Because now we have white phosphorus.

File: cbb.jpg (60KB, 680x818px) Image search: [Google]

60KB, 680x818px

>>33694482
The gubberment is a bunch of pussies

File: IMG_20151120_222414.jpg (176KB, 462x945px) Image search: [Google]

176KB, 462x945px

>3 and a half meters range
>obvious target
>heavy, bulky, makes one regular rifleman that can kill people at 500m range only able to do so at extremely short ranges now
>invitation to get totally raped if you get captured with it, and very few people will have sympathy with you if you do

Instead
>pop WP or half-second delay frag rounds into GraPi
>shoot like eight times from 300m from semi-cover or conealment, trying to hit the firing slit of the bunker / pillbox you're having trouble with
>miss seven, hit one, torch it / blow it up meanwhile have a wank or joke with your fellow conscripts
>same result but a lot less stressful and suicidal

Whodathunk that the easier and safer solutions are more appealing

>>33694482
there are no wars on retard

>>33694482
Because everyone carries a grenade launcher instead

>>33694566
>3 and a half meters
What?

>>33694566
You could have just said you have no idea and it would be a shorter post.

>>33694566
>3 and a half meters range
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M2_flamethrower

Effective firing range 65 1⁄2 feet (20.0 m)
Maximum firing range 132 feet (40 m)

>>33694593
>>33694596
>>33694597
Yeah amazing, it's called hyperbole. If you'd have served you'd know that the range increments on the rifle range go in 50m steps out to how funny you're feeling that day. After the first one (at best), the flamethrower is out. This is objectively shit for anything but knife fights in the jungle or in some kind of absurd urban environment where streets somehow don't exist and it's just house stacked wall to wall on house. So if you're going favela clearing, bring the flamer, but in any real combat environment you want your rifle.

They have great psychological effect. You can put a blast over a bunker and the guy inside knows he can surrender or burn. Can't do that with a grenade.
Great tools to clear shrubs and bushes too.

>>33694605
>Yeah amazing, it's called hyperbole.
merely pretending

>>33694605
>Jungle

>not a real combat environment

Wew

File: 1cbfa0df5173e000e010eb1a192d6bc1_meme-hes-right-you-know-meme-hes-right-you-know_800-598.jpg (103KB, 800x598px) Image search: [Google]

103KB, 800x598px

>>33694605
> it's called hyperbole.

>>33694636
30 years ago maybe! Get with the times.

Who needs a flamethrower when we have lasers.

File: SMAW.jpg (82KB, 1152x1152px) Image search: [Google]

82KB, 1152x1152px

>>33694605

You can't destroy fortifications with a rifle, senpai. It's not like an RTS where you can shoot a stone wall enough times and it will die.

>>33694482

For real OP, this is the modern replacement for the flamethrower, and while it doesn't have as sustained a rate of fire, it'll cook Hajis and whatever they're hiding in real good at farther range. You don't hear about it much because cooking people is usually bad press.

>>33694749
Yeah, but you can with a 40mm, which is what I pointed out earlier. Or a Bunkerfaust, which we also use, and which is way more convenient than the old Hand-Flamm WP popper.

File: fallujah-iraq-us.jpg (71KB, 1200x800px) Image search: [Google]

71KB, 1200x800px

>>33694749
>because cooking people is usually bad press.
which is funny because that's exactly what they did during the insurgency in iraq.
>wp dug in arabs
>wait for them to leave their positions
>bomb them
>repeat

>>33694778
Any proven or reliable instances of this happening

>>33694783
yes. it was a big drama back then because the brits can't be in theater where it is being used in an anti-personnel role per their laws and naturally in an urban environment some civilians got caught up in it which became another controversy.
one of the american elements that fired it (iirc artillery) bragged, in print, about how effective the strategy had been. they said it was initially used a screening element, then went on to comment that it had been effective at flushing enemies out of scattered small positions where HE was having no effect, whereupon they would then shell again with HE.
the funny thing was it was bloggers that found the article and forced the dod to own up to it. imagine /pol/ finding a public article corroborating allegations of war crimes and that was basically the situation.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_phosphorus_munitions#Use_in_Iraq_.282004.29
>On November 15, 2005, U.S. Department of Defense spokesman Lieutenant Colonel Barry Venable confirmed to the BBC that white phosphorus had been used as an incendiary antipersonnel weapon in Fallujah. Venable stated "When you have enemy forces that are in covered positions that your high explosive artillery rounds are not having an impact on and you wish to get them out of those positions, one technique is to fire a white phosphorus round into the position because the combined effects of the fire and smoke - and in some case the terror brought about by the explosion on the ground - will drive them out of the holes so that you can kill them with high explosives."[16][17]

>>33694500
>but when was the last time we used those either?
ll the time? We even have thermobaric ammo for 40mm.

>>33694822
Hehe he, hehe hehe heh he.... cooool....

File: 1467656954185.jpg (29KB, 480x385px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 480x385px

>>33694482

We could but in realty just not needed. Now if we get back into asymmetrical warfare with proper armies then yes we would. Also they are not human rights violations despite what others say. Read the Geneva Conventions and the SOFA.