<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/">

	<channel>
	  <!-- main channel info -->
        <title>FLAMETHROWERS </title>
        <link>http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/topic/19479/FLAMETHROWERS</link>
        <description>
        <![CDATA[ Does anyone know if flame weapons have been banned or restricted by some international treaty or agreement ?Brits and Americans were big users in WW2 and I think the Brits took some Crocodiles to Korea and the Americans used Napalm and Flamethrowers in Vietnam but they seem to have vanished from the inventory now . Of course the Russians have plenty of modern flame weapons &nbsp; ]]>
        </description>

		<!-- optional elements -->
		<language>en-us</language>
		<copyright>Copyright 2011, Yuku</copyright>
		<managingEditor>feeds@yuku.com (FeedMaster)</managingEditor>
		<webMaster>webmaster@yuku.com (WebMaster)</webMaster>
		<!-- note: dates need to be RFC 822 formated "Sat, 07 Sep 2002 00:00:01 GMT" -->
		<pubDate>Wed, 15 Feb 2012 09:06:22 GMT</pubDate>
		<lastBuildDate>Wed, 23 May 2012 18:11:59 GMT</lastBuildDate>
		<generator>Kickapps Feeds 1.0</generator>
		<docs>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss</docs>
		<ttl>60</ttl>

		<rating>
		{pics-1.1 &quot;http://www.icra.org/ratingsv02.html&quot; l gen true for &quot;http://yuku.com&quot; r (nz 1 vz 1 lz 1 oz 1 cz 1 ) &quot;http://www.rsac.org/ratingsv01.html&quot; l gen true for &quot;http://yuku.com&quot; r (n 0 s 0 v 0 l 0 ))
		</rating>
		<textInput>
			<title>Search</title>
			<description>Search Domain</description>
			<name>q</name>
			<link>http://yuku.com/search/direct/</link>
		</textInput>
		<!-- skip
		<skipHours>
			<hour>23</hour>
		</skipHours>
		<skipDays>
			<day>Monday</day>
			<day>Wednesday</day>
			<day>Friday</day>
		</skipDays>-->
		<!-- extensions -->


		<!-- channel items -->
		<!-- descriptions should be shorter than 500 char to be polite -->
		<!-- html shoud be stripped or escaped -->
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[ Re: FLAMETHROWERS  ]]></title>
			<link>http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/reply/283529/FLAMETHROWERS#reply-283529</link>
			<description><![CDATA[ Lost in translation ]]></description>

			<!-- optional elements -->
			<author>feeds@yuku.com (Sam)</author>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/reply/283529</guid>
			<pubDate>Wed, 23 May 2012 16:15:20 PST</pubDate>
			<!-- extensions -->

		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[ Re: FLAMETHROWERS  ]]></title>
			<link>http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/reply/283496/FLAMETHROWERS#reply-283496</link>
			<description><![CDATA[ &nbsp; The incidendary rockets make life so much easier.&nbsp; With a Flamethrower you must get very close (50&nbsp;meters)&nbsp;and stand still&nbsp;to deliver your load.&nbsp; With incidendary rockets you have double the range.&nbsp; With a White Phosph...<br /><a href="http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/reply/283496/FLAMETHROWERS#reply-283496">Read More</a> ]]></description>

			<!-- optional elements -->
			<author>feeds@yuku.com (Dcnwilltex)</author>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/reply/283496</guid>
			<pubDate>Wed, 23 May 2012 14:31:50 PST</pubDate>
			<!-- extensions -->

		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[ Re: FLAMETHROWERS  ]]></title>
			<link>http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/reply/283401/FLAMETHROWERS#reply-283401</link>
			<description><![CDATA[ Dcnwilltex wrote:Then let's say that the re-introduction of flamethrowers into a fairly well-trained US Army (or USMC) would be relatively easy.&nbsp; Not really.&nbsp; It's going to be very difficult doing 3-5 second rushes with a 60 rig attached on your...<br /><a href="http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/reply/283401/FLAMETHROWERS#reply-283401">Read More</a> ]]></description>

			<!-- optional elements -->
			<author>feeds@yuku.com (emc)</author>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/reply/283401</guid>
			<pubDate>Wed, 23 May 2012 02:32:34 PST</pubDate>
			<!-- extensions -->

		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[ Re: FLAMETHROWERS  ]]></title>
			<link>http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/reply/283362/FLAMETHROWERS#reply-283362</link>
			<description><![CDATA[ Then let's say that the re-introduction of flamethrowers into a fairly well-trained US Army (or USMC) would be relatively easy.&nbsp; Not really.&nbsp; It's going to be very difficult doing 3-5 second rushes with a 60 rig attached on your back.&nbsp; One ...<br /><a href="http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/reply/283362/FLAMETHROWERS#reply-283362">Read More</a> ]]></description>

			<!-- optional elements -->
			<author>feeds@yuku.com (Dcnwilltex)</author>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/reply/283362</guid>
			<pubDate>Tue, 22 May 2012 21:56:44 PST</pubDate>
			<!-- extensions -->

		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[ Re: FLAMETHROWERS  ]]></title>
			<link>http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/reply/282675/FLAMETHROWERS#reply-282675</link>
			<description><![CDATA[ There's also the little issue of the fact that you're asking some poor bastard to go out there with ten gallons of highly flammable, potentially explosive liquid strapped to his back.  In the Pacific, we lost a LOT of Marines to the Japanese catching on t...<br /><a href="http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/reply/282675/FLAMETHROWERS#reply-282675">Read More</a> ]]></description>

			<!-- optional elements -->
			<author>feeds@yuku.com (rdfox)</author>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/reply/282675</guid>
			<pubDate>Fri, 18 May 2012 15:18:55 PST</pubDate>
			<!-- extensions -->

		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[ Re: FLAMETHROWERS  ]]></title>
			<link>http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/reply/282575/FLAMETHROWERS#reply-282575</link>
			<description><![CDATA[ One detail was the igniter system.&nbsp; The M1A1 used a "spark" igniter (as I understand it), where the M2-2 types used a more reliable igniter - very important when one of your common uses for a flamethrower is to support an amphibious attack (meaning t...<br /><a href="http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/reply/282575/FLAMETHROWERS#reply-282575">Read More</a> ]]></description>

			<!-- optional elements -->
			<author>feeds@yuku.com (binder001)</author>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/reply/282575</guid>
			<pubDate>Thu, 17 May 2012 21:02:46 PST</pubDate>
			<!-- extensions -->

		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[ Re: FLAMETHROWERS  ]]></title>
			<link>http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/reply/281209/FLAMETHROWERS#reply-281209</link>
			<description><![CDATA[ "I suspect that the really hard parts are making it reliable enough and sturdy enough for use by a WW2-era Western army"

Precisely, the early US ones tended to go "click" when the trigger was pressed or leave a flaming puddle fire yards in front of the...<br /><a href="http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/reply/281209/FLAMETHROWERS#reply-281209">Read More</a> ]]></description>

			<!-- optional elements -->
			<author>feeds@yuku.com (RENPSU)</author>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/reply/281209</guid>
			<pubDate>Fri, 11 May 2012 00:14:50 PST</pubDate>
			<!-- extensions -->

		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[ Re: FLAMETHROWERS  ]]></title>
			<link>http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/reply/280982/FLAMETHROWERS#reply-280982</link>
			<description><![CDATA[ RENPSU wrote:"Traditional" flamethrowers are simple to build"

Actually, they're not - The Chemical Service went through hell in WWII before it fielded an acceptable one IIRC in 1944 

http://www.history.army.m...10/10-3/CMH_Pub_10-3.pdfFuel tank, pre...<br /><a href="http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/reply/280982/FLAMETHROWERS#reply-280982">Read More</a> ]]></description>

			<!-- optional elements -->
			<author>feeds@yuku.com (emc)</author>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/reply/280982</guid>
			<pubDate>Wed, 09 May 2012 21:14:29 PST</pubDate>
			<!-- extensions -->

		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[ Re: FLAMETHROWERS  ]]></title>
			<link>http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/reply/280963/FLAMETHROWERS#reply-280963</link>
			<description><![CDATA[ RENPSU wrote:

"Traditional" flamethrowers are simple to build"Actually, they're not - The Chemical Service went through hell in WWII before it fielded an acceptable one IIRC in 1944 http://www.history.army.m...10/10-3/CMH_Pub_10-3.pdfThey're simple eno...<br /><a href="http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/reply/280963/FLAMETHROWERS#reply-280963">Read More</a> ]]></description>

			<!-- optional elements -->
			<author>feeds@yuku.com (sergeante)</author>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/reply/280963</guid>
			<pubDate>Wed, 09 May 2012 20:11:53 PST</pubDate>
			<!-- extensions -->

		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[ Re: FLAMETHROWERS  ]]></title>
			<link>http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/reply/280949/FLAMETHROWERS#reply-280949</link>
			<description><![CDATA[ "Traditional" flamethrowers are simple to build"

Actually, they're not - The Chemical Service went through hell in WWII before it fielded an acceptable one IIRC in 1944 

http://www.history.army.m...10/10-3/CMH_Pub_10-3.pdf ]]></description>

			<!-- optional elements -->
			<author>feeds@yuku.com (RENPSU)</author>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/reply/280949</guid>
			<pubDate>Wed, 09 May 2012 19:46:13 PST</pubDate>
			<!-- extensions -->

		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[ Re: FLAMETHROWERS  ]]></title>
			<link>http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/reply/280936/FLAMETHROWERS#reply-280936</link>
			<description><![CDATA[ That is yet another good point. ]]></description>

			<!-- optional elements -->
			<author>feeds@yuku.com (Sam)</author>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/reply/280936</guid>
			<pubDate>Wed, 09 May 2012 19:14:36 PST</pubDate>
			<!-- extensions -->

		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[ Re: FLAMETHROWERS  ]]></title>
			<link>http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/reply/280933/FLAMETHROWERS#reply-280933</link>
			<description><![CDATA[ Sam wrote: 

Then let's say that the re-introduction of flamethrowers into a fairly well-trained US Army (or USMC) would be relatively easy.Technologically? Certainly. Rationally? I think that ship has sailed in the direction of portable HE rockets and ...<br /><a href="http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/reply/280933/FLAMETHROWERS#reply-280933">Read More</a> ]]></description>

			<!-- optional elements -->
			<author>feeds@yuku.com (sergeante)</author>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/reply/280933</guid>
			<pubDate>Wed, 09 May 2012 19:10:58 PST</pubDate>
			<!-- extensions -->

		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[ Re: FLAMETHROWERS  ]]></title>
			<link>http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/reply/280922/FLAMETHROWERS#reply-280922</link>
			<description><![CDATA[ Then let's say that the re-introduction of flamethrowers into a fairly well-trained US Army (or USMC) would be relatively easy. ]]></description>

			<!-- optional elements -->
			<author>feeds@yuku.com (Sam)</author>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/reply/280922</guid>
			<pubDate>Wed, 09 May 2012 18:51:34 PST</pubDate>
			<!-- extensions -->

		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[ Re: FLAMETHROWERS  ]]></title>
			<link>http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/reply/280906/FLAMETHROWERS#reply-280906</link>
			<description><![CDATA[ Sam wrote: 

Come one, you see the difference... For instance, the unwarlike army that issues the above pictured flamethrowers hasn't had simple marksmen for decades and still gets a handful of (sort of) snipers only from within its Special Forces commu...<br /><a href="http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/reply/280906/FLAMETHROWERS#reply-280906">Read More</a> ]]></description>

			<!-- optional elements -->
			<author>feeds@yuku.com (sergeante)</author>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/reply/280906</guid>
			<pubDate>Wed, 09 May 2012 17:52:57 PST</pubDate>
			<!-- extensions -->

		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[ Re: FLAMETHROWERS  ]]></title>
			<link>http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/reply/280903/FLAMETHROWERS#reply-280903</link>
			<description><![CDATA[ Come one, you see the difference... For instance, the unwarlike army that issues the above pictured flamethrowers hasn't had simple marksmen for decades and still gets a handful of (sort of) snipers only from within its Special Forces community.
Flamethr...<br /><a href="http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/reply/280903/FLAMETHROWERS#reply-280903">Read More</a> ]]></description>

			<!-- optional elements -->
			<author>feeds@yuku.com (Sam)</author>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/reply/280903</guid>
			<pubDate>Wed, 09 May 2012 17:43:13 PST</pubDate>
			<!-- extensions -->

		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[ Re: FLAMETHROWERS  ]]></title>
			<link>http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/reply/280895/FLAMETHROWERS#reply-280895</link>
			<description><![CDATA[ Sam wrote:

Of course, I meant easier than sniping, for example.Sniping is a spcialized skill, using specialized weapons,&nbsp;in pursuit of limited objectives.&nbsp;Flamethrowers are similarly specialized weapons, for use in&nbsp;particular situations....<br /><a href="http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/reply/280895/FLAMETHROWERS#reply-280895">Read More</a> ]]></description>

			<!-- optional elements -->
			<author>feeds@yuku.com (sergeante)</author>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/reply/280895</guid>
			<pubDate>Wed, 09 May 2012 16:41:33 PST</pubDate>
			<!-- extensions -->

		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[ Re: FLAMETHROWERS  ]]></title>
			<link>http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/reply/280891/FLAMETHROWERS#reply-280891</link>
			<description><![CDATA[ Of course, I meant easier than sniping, for example. ]]></description>

			<!-- optional elements -->
			<author>feeds@yuku.com (Sam)</author>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/reply/280891</guid>
			<pubDate>Wed, 09 May 2012 16:25:22 PST</pubDate>
			<!-- extensions -->

		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[ Re: FLAMETHROWERS  ]]></title>
			<link>http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/reply/280890/FLAMETHROWERS#reply-280890</link>
			<description><![CDATA[ Sam wrote:

"Traditional" flamethrowers are simple to build and use. I don't see this as a gap that, in case of major conflict, could not be filled relatively easily.Actually, flamethrowers are not at all easy to use. They are heavy and dangerous for th...<br /><a href="http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/reply/280890/FLAMETHROWERS#reply-280890">Read More</a> ]]></description>

			<!-- optional elements -->
			<author>feeds@yuku.com (sergeante)</author>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/reply/280890</guid>
			<pubDate>Wed, 09 May 2012 16:04:58 PST</pubDate>
			<!-- extensions -->

		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[ Re: FLAMETHROWERS  ]]></title>
			<link>http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/reply/280889/FLAMETHROWERS#reply-280889</link>
			<description><![CDATA[ IcelofAngeln wrote: 

I'm sorry -- I didn't realize we were fighting wars these days according to total war standards.We aren't--- these days. But the notion of warfare conducted according to 'rules' is rather artificial, and ultimately impermanent. The...<br /><a href="http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/reply/280889/FLAMETHROWERS#reply-280889">Read More</a> ]]></description>

			<!-- optional elements -->
			<author>feeds@yuku.com (sergeante)</author>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/reply/280889</guid>
			<pubDate>Wed, 09 May 2012 16:02:35 PST</pubDate>
			<!-- extensions -->

		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[ Re: FLAMETHROWERS  ]]></title>
			<link>http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/reply/280874/FLAMETHROWERS#reply-280874</link>
			<description><![CDATA[ "Traditional" flamethrowers are simple to build and use. I don't see this as a gap that, in case of major conflict, could not be filled relatively easily. ]]></description>

			<!-- optional elements -->
			<author>feeds@yuku.com (Sam)</author>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/reply/280874</guid>
			<pubDate>Wed, 09 May 2012 14:53:17 PST</pubDate>
			<!-- extensions -->

		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[ FLAMETHROWERS  ]]></title>
			<link>http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/topic/19479/FLAMETHROWERS</link>
			<description><![CDATA[ Does anyone know if flame weapons have been banned or restricted by some international treaty or agreement ?Brits and Americans were big users in WW2 and I think the Brits took some Crocodiles to Korea and the Americans used Napalm and Flamethrowers in Vi...<br /><a href="http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/topic/19479/FLAMETHROWERS">Read More</a> ]]></description>

			<!-- optional elements -->
			<author>feeds@yuku.com (Razor)</author>
			<guid isPermaLink="true">http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.com/topic/19479</guid>
			<pubDate>Wed, 15 Feb 2012 09:06:22 PST</pubDate>
			<!-- extensions -->

		</item>
    <!-- end items -->

  </channel>
</rss>
