Fire When Ready
Why we should consider using flamethrowers in Afghanistan
According to this Slate article flamethrowers are no more and yet it would be an ideal weapon for “de-caving” Bin Laden. Has anyone here used one of these?
Would they really be effective in Afghanistan or is this just the author’s fantasy?
Flamethrowers are generally less effective than you’d think, are risky to the soldier using them, and fairly short-ranged. There’s not much point in using them when there are better ways of doing the job, such as just collapsing the cave, or using FAE weapons.
Bingo. It’s not that they don’t work, it’s just that other things these days work better.
oh sure they work a treat even in WWII when killing civilians who refused to come out of caves in fear of being shot by the USMC , its just that FAE is better (though even more civilian casulties are possible) and you need a man on the ground + FAE is over in seconds a bloke with a flamer would be prime meat for a TV crew which would then be propaganda ammo ,
For the military-acronym-impaired, what’s FAE?
FAE = Fuel-Air Explosive.
Other sites:
[li]Slow loading movie/gifthis one describe the Russians using what they describe as a vacuum bomb[/li]
I had heard a story, while in the Marines, that people found following the use of an FAE, were laying there on the groud with their lungs turned inside out, literally sucked out of them. Yummy.
Ah. Nasty indeed.
Thanks, thinks.
This reminds me of the book, Napalm and Silly Putty by George Carlin, where he talks about the invention of flamethrowers. It went something like:
“I wonder where anyone got the idea to invent the flamethrower. Did some guy hanging out with his friends one day just go, ‘Hey, look at those people across the street. Gee, I wish I could light them on fire.’”
Nah napalm is different , its just petrolium jelly with an adhesive agent al la fight club frozen orange juice ,which in vietnam when US CAS napalmed villages the civvies and the VC could scrape it off before it burnt too bad, now napalm II was different and could not be wiped off
The Japanese civilians weren’t so much afraid of being shot as they were of the perceived dishonor of surrendering instead of dying for the emperor. To my knowledge, the flamethrowers were usually used on caves (I assume you’re talking about Iwo Jima, where most of that sort of footage came from) when there were Japanese soldiers inside who refused to surrender. Sometimes there were civilians with them. That doesn’t make the civilians the target.
I’ve seen plenty of film of US Marines trying to get Japanese civilians to come back to safety instead of leaping to their deaths from cliff faces on Iwo. I’m not saying that the US military didn’t kill a lot of civilians in WWII, both Japanese and European, but I have to raise issue with your suggestion that Marines on the ground targeted a civilian population for extermination.
I don’t know who told you napalm was petroleum jelly with an adhesive agent, but they’re wrong. Vaseline is not a very good weapon. Napalm was, and still is, gasoline mixed with a thickening agent. The thickening agent was napthene and palmitate, hence the word “napalm.” The purpose of the thickener was not to make it stick to you; it was to make it burn slower. Gasoline burns SO fast it’s hard to light it afire and spray it on anything; it’s burned up before it hits the target.
Napalm today still used gasoline as the main ingredient, but the thickening agent is now polystyrene and benzene, apparently because its ignition can be better controlled. If napalm is sticky, it’s an incidental benefit; believe me, if you’re close enough to a blast of napalm, whther it’s sticky or not isn’t going to make a difference.
<nitpick> It happened on Saipan, not Iwo. Iwo is a miserable volcanic island. At one point the U.S. debated if it wouldn’t be the perfect place to use war gases because there wasn’t a civilian population.</nitpick>
Whew!
I thought you were going to say I couldn’t have MINE anymore.
jar
**
I don’t know who told you napalm was petroleum jelly with an adhesive agent, but they’re wrong. Vaseline is not a very good weapon. Napalm was, and still is, gasolinemixed with a thickening agent. The thickening agent was napthene and palmitate, hence the word “napalm.” The purpose of the thickener was not to make it stick to you; it was to make it burn slower. Gasoline burns SO fast it’s hard to light it afire and spray it on anything; it’s burned up before it hits the target.
Napalm today still used gasoline as the main ingredient, but the thickening agent is now polystyrene and benzene, apparently because its ignition can be better controlled. If napalm is sticky, it’s an incidental benefit; believe me, if you’re close enough to a blast of napalm, whther it’s sticky or not isn’t going to make a difference. **
yeah , um i heard of petrolium jelly for hair and stuff
and figured there must be something else in it too , i guess the 2nd version made the napalm sticky too since people who were very near where it was deployed couldn’t wipe it off