well.. if i were to choose one of these two options i'd certainly take weapons (hehe just kidding) ... i'd tick yes on "WORDS" for sure. Because, we talk so everybody else listens and dead bodies don't listen, so why kill?!
In every country there are people who think they're badly treated or misunderstood and that is so natural. whether it's a political or religeous oppression , the response is always the same: WORDS or WEAPONS.
comparing the two reactions, Bombing attracts attention yet it escalates the anger of mankind. Bombs targeting public places kill the public ! aren't they the ones who should take the decision of change? i can't figure out the concept behind killing innocent people and i really wish to be enlightened. On the other hand, objection may be taken seriously if it was held peacefully. protestation, for instance, is a real example of WORDy resonse. it draws attention of leaders, politicians and individuals with zero victims.
with new technologies like the "internet" ideology, beliefs, aims and ideas can be declaired loudly and will reach people in a wider radial extension that may cover the whole six continents! anonymous or false names can also be used do distract any surrounding dangers. isn't it better than executing all others and end up standing on bunch of cemeteries? Duh !
