In essence the pen is the net...without words here there would be nothing! I do believe the pen is mightier than the sword and that it accomplishes much more in the final analysis.

Unless you're on a beach. ;)

-------------[]-[][]-----------------------------------------------------------------

You could kill more men with a sword. Faster. Then take all of their pens.

Also, I remember in the movie mask of Zorro he drew a Z in the guys neck with his sword.

I win.

The pen is mightier because the pen can stop the sword, but a sword cant stop the pen.

If you kill someone, they will not be writing anything. Some else may write it, but it would not be the same.

ex: a war. signing a treaty will stop the war.

And stabbing an ambassador will start one.

The pen reaches more people at a time and it doesnt matter where those people are. Where as a sword can only kill people at a close distance.

You ascribe the results of using the pen to the pen, but fail to do so for the sword. If the consequences of the written word can be called the consequences of the pen, then the consequences of using the sword can be called the consequences of the sword. Thus, if you kill the right person, you can easily reach just as many people in just as wide-spread an area as you could with a pen.

The sword is only effective to get the point across if the potential victim fears its use. If you actually use the sword you don't get your point across to the victim but maybe the bystanders. If the potential victims are standing up for a cause and the fear of the sword is being used for suppression it may not be effective depending on how devoted they are. Gandhi's peace movement against the British imperialists is an example.