Are there any ways to protect yourself from a modern flame-thrower?

[ChristopherRPark]

If it's urban warfare and your position is in a building. But your enemies in the street have a modern flame-thrower, do you have a chance? And if mole-squads in Vietnam had had them, would US have won that war?
Update : I mean Russian Shmel' and it's likes, those that produce "vacuum"

[HydroPonics]

Yeah, there is a way to protect yourself from a Flame Thrower.

Don't get hit?

[myriverse]

Don't know if you really want to use a flamethrower in a jungle.

[HeallunRumblebelly]

Don't know if you really want to use a flamethrower in a jungle.

Aren't they high vis, prone to malfunction and short range? Seems like a good "siege weapon" to clear buildings with no regard for what is nearby or inside, but war simply isn't fought that way at this time.

[Champion_Standing]

Punji sticks

[HeallunRumblebelly]

Punji sticks

...guile :3

[GnashingOfTeeth]

Same reposter.... "If it's urban warfare and your position is in a building. But your enemies in the street have a modern flame-thrower, do you have a chance? And if mole-squads in Vietnam had had them, would US have won that war?"

Google his text. Cut and paste master.

[Cecily]

Aren't they high vis, prone to malfunction and short range? Seems like a good "siege weapon" to clear buildings with no regard for what is nearby or inside, but war simply isn't fought that way at this time.

Versus modern weapons that only kill their intended target.

[HeallunRumblebelly]

Versus modern weapons that only kill their intended target.

Well, that's what I'm saying. If your intended target is literally everyone in an area (total war, which first world countries really don't engage in) it might be a decent way to clear a building, but we simply have entirely too much explosive ordinance for these to be required.

[HeallunRumblebelly]

ordnance* it's been a long day.