why does every dipshit fricking Wargame kiddie find some new vehicle to obsess about and says we need to send it to ukraine without asking whether or not it's been retired for FIFTY FRICKING YEARS?
>uhhhh russia hangs on to its absolute dogshit from the 1940s >this means america must too!
no. The last things we have remotely that old are the M113A3s, and those are 40 years old.
Wrong. >The United States Army TACOM Life Cycle Management Command (TACOM-LCMC) has directed that the M728, M60AVLB and QM60-series target vehicles are to be withdrawn from use and logistical support by 2024 with any units remaining to be demilitarized and sold for scrapping through the DLA Disposition Services Defense Reutilization and Marketing Office (DLADS-DRMO).[138]
Flame-throwers are banned for use against infantry. The fact people wiggle around by saying it is for 'terrain clearance' is cope. Read the Protocol on Incendiary Weapons. Thermobaric weapons are not covered by the protocol.
>Since 1978, flamethrowers and the last flame 'tank' the M132 armored flamethrower have not been part of the US arsenal. [17] Though not banned, these weapons have fallen out of use and have instead been replaced with non-flamethrower incendiary weapons like Thermobaric weapons which may have been fielded in Afghanistan by the United States in 2009 [18] and by Russia in the 2022 Russo-Ukrainian war.[19]
Please cite any treaty the US or Ukraine has signed that bans flame weapons.
why does every dipshit fricking Wargame kiddie find some new vehicle to obsess about and says we need to send it to ukraine without asking whether or not it's been retired for FIFTY FRICKING YEARS?
-Muh t-54
have a nice day moron
>uhhhh russia hangs on to its absolute dogshit from the 1940s
>this means america must too!
no. The last things we have remotely that old are the M113A3s, and those are 40 years old.
Pretty sure we've held on to a frick ton of m60s
Wrong.
>The United States Army TACOM Life Cycle Management Command (TACOM-LCMC) has directed that the M728, M60AVLB and QM60-series target vehicles are to be withdrawn from use and logistical support by 2024 with any units remaining to be demilitarized and sold for scrapping through the DLA Disposition Services Defense Reutilization and Marketing Office (DLADS-DRMO).[138]
what if you took a QM60 and added an autoloader and called it an UGCV
anon a QM60 is literal scrap
it's a target vehicle with everything removed
but doesn't it have enough left to drive around under remote control or is it literally just a static target?
it's a static target shot to pieces by TOWs and 120mm
you are a worthless moron
Still superior to BMP
GIVE UKRAINE ADATS
I DONT CARE IF ANY EXIST ANYMORE GIVE IT TO UKRAINE
LOgistics are SOMEOBE ELSE'S PROBLEM
-------
2012-2022 shitpost war veteran
moldy labia
both sides have some better to-55/62s somewhere deep in storage, there is a reason they dont use them
>to-55
Flame Thrower tanks are banned.
No they're not, and it wouldn't matter anyway since Russia has used TOS launchers in this war
Flame-throwers are banned for use against infantry. The fact people wiggle around by saying it is for 'terrain clearance' is cope. Read the Protocol on Incendiary Weapons. Thermobaric weapons are not covered by the protocol.
>Since 1978, flamethrowers and the last flame 'tank' the M132 armored flamethrower have not been part of the US arsenal. [17] Though not banned, these weapons have fallen out of use and have instead been replaced with non-flamethrower incendiary weapons like Thermobaric weapons which may have been fielded in Afghanistan by the United States in 2009 [18] and by Russia in the 2022 Russo-Ukrainian war.[19]
Please cite any treaty the US or Ukraine has signed that bans flame weapons.
>1978
The Protocol on Incendiary Weapons was signed in 1983. Ukraine was a signatory in 1982. USA was a signatory in 1982 and ratified i n 1995.
You are a clueless moron.
ok ok frick me ig
BASED moron
Anon, the protocol places no restrictions on incendiary use vs. military targets
The escalation, think of the escalating escalation escalationing escale.
Didn't they put a minigun on an M113? Send that instead, seems way more useful
M167 VADS. Shitty AA but used as infantry support. Retired by US. 20mm rounds are plentiful too. Weirdly not sent.
not sent because all units were stood down and the vehicles scrapped in 1997 dork
Because the US is holding them in reserve for emergency SHORAD
wrong moron
That picture does not disprove what I said, Satan
show me these m163 vads in storage
Show me that they aren’t in storage
>M167 VADS
Huh, I could have sworn it was a 7.62 minigun meant to be fired at ground targets during Vietnam, guess my memory is off