How long you can live far away without partner or wife or husband? (38)
montemonte: When one partner is in the military there can be a separation for an indefinite amount of time. They have no choice but to deal with the separation. They are grateful that someone doesn't come to their door announcing that their spouse/partner has been killed.
Can you love the person without them physically being at your side is really the question. My answer is yes.
Can you love the person without them physically being at your side is really the question. My answer is yes.
That's my answer as well.
------ This thread is Archived ------
jac379: If you're asking how long someone would wait, you're asking for a time frame to be specified.
You've contradicted yourself with this post.
You've contradicted yourself with this post.
i think i cleared my question
and the meaning is clear,how long one can wait for someone when someone is away?
pls if you dont like ,just make your way and pls as @halvo communicate 2nd times for you clearly
leave us in peace and mr halvo
------ This thread is Archived ------
Antoniacv: That's my answer as well.
------ This thread is Archived ------
classicboy: i think i cleared my question
and the meaning is clear,how long one can wait for someone when someone is away?
pls if you dont like ,just make your way and pls as @halvo communicate 2nd times for you clearly
leave us in peace and mr halvo
and the meaning is clear,how long one can wait for someone when someone is away?
pls if you dont like ,just make your way and pls as @halvo communicate 2nd times for you clearly
leave us in peace and mr halvo
If you'd made yourself clear, I wouldn't be asking questions.
Are people only allowed to join in the discussion if they give the answer you want?
I'm asking why would someone put an arbitrary time-frame on how long they would wait for someone they supposedly want to be with?
If they don't want to be with someone, time is irrelevant. If they do want to be with someone, time is irrelevant. If they change their mind, time is irrelevant.
------ This thread is Archived ------
jac379: If you'd made yourself clear, I wouldn't be asking questions.
Are people only allowed to join in the discussion if they give the answer you want?
I'm asking why would someone put an arbitrary time-frame on how long they would wait for someone they supposedly want to be with?
If they don't want to be with someone, time is irrelevant. If they do want to be with someone, time is irrelevant. If they change their mind, time is irrelevant.
Are people only allowed to join in the discussion if they give the answer you want?
I'm asking why would someone put an arbitrary time-frame on how long they would wait for someone they supposedly want to be with?
If they don't want to be with someone, time is irrelevant. If they do want to be with someone, time is irrelevant. If they change their mind, time is irrelevant.
its fine now
you can ask and discuss as much as you want but without openly targeting someone
i agree with you,time is irelvantt if someone want you
but i my question of post was measure of tolerance and wait further in months or years for someone
thanks
------ This thread is Archived ------
wimps...........wimps..........wimps......couples were separated for years because of wars!!!!!!!! They didn´t lose their love....and they had a lotta adjusting to do when they got back together again. Problem nowadays is...........there are too many temptations when people are separated.
The world wars actually brought out the best in people cos they appreciated what they had.
The world wars actually brought out the best in people cos they appreciated what they had.
------ This thread is Archived ------
hoolet: wimps...........wimps..........wimps......couples were separated for years because of wars!!!!!!!! They didn´t lose their love....and they had a lotta adjusting to do when they got back together again. Problem nowadays is...........there are too many temptations when people are separated.
The world wars actually brought out the best in people cos they appreciated what they had.
The world wars actually brought out the best in people cos they appreciated what they had.
you said some thing very true and nic every beautifuly
what are those temptations?
------ This thread is Archived ------
classicboy: its fine now
you can ask and discuss as much as you want but without openly targeting someone
i agree with you,time is irelvantt if someone want you
but i my question of post was measure of tolerance and wait further in months or years for someone
thanks
you can ask and discuss as much as you want but without openly targeting someone
i agree with you,time is irelvantt if someone want you
but i my question of post was measure of tolerance and wait further in months or years for someone
thanks
Discussing issues with another poster is targeting someone...?
If I ask this question does it mean I'm targeting you?
Is there a limit on many times you can respond to one poster on a thread in the rules?
------ This thread is Archived ------
hoolet: wimps...........wimps..........wimps......couples were separated for years because of wars!!!!!!!! They didn´t lose their love....and they had a lotta adjusting to do when they got back together again. Problem nowadays is...........there are too many temptations when people are separated.
The world wars actually brought out the best in people cos they appreciated what they had.
The world wars actually brought out the best in people cos they appreciated what they had.
------ This thread is Archived ------
jac379: Discussing issues with another poster is targeting someone...?
If I ask this question does it mean I'm targeting you?
Is there a limit on many times you can respond to one poster on a thread in the rules?
If I ask this question does it mean I'm targeting you?
Is there a limit on many times you can respond to one poster on a thread in the rules?
i am talking about mr halvo who ha sbeen targeted
he replied you clearly but your reply was more aggressive and of personal type to him
------ This thread is Archived ------
classicboy: i am talking about mr halvo who ha sbeen targeted
he replied you clearly but your reply was more aggressive and of personal type to him
he replied you clearly but your reply was more aggressive and of personal type to him
He didn't reply clearly and he became patronising when I asked for clarification.
He contradicted himself in saying how long he was prepared to wait and 'thing' is not an object of clarity when asking a question.
I understand English is not your first language, but I believe you are targeting me for criticism inappropriately.
------ This thread is Archived ------
jac379: He didn't reply clearly and he became patronising when I asked for clarification.
He contradicted himself in saying how long he was prepared to wait and 'thing' is not an object of clarity when asking a question.
I understand English is not your first language, but I believe you are targeting me for criticism inappropriately.
He contradicted himself in saying how long he was prepared to wait and 'thing' is not an object of clarity when asking a question.
I understand English is not your first language, but I believe you are targeting me for criticism inappropriately.
might be my words reflect that,,yes i its not my native language,,i t did not try to critise someone,,anyway sorry if it means critism for you
but as you said you used words like contradicted and patronsiing in this post for halvo,,,,its some thing personal and avoidable
so pls avoid this in forums
you can message users in person in such cases
thanks
------ This thread is Archived ------
hoolet: wimps...........wimps..........wimps......couples were separated for years because of wars!!!!
Not entirely true. We all know how the lovely English ladies behaved with the GIs in transit when their own men were off fighting. 
------ This thread is Archived ------
classicboy: might be my words reflect that,,yes i its not my native language,,i t did not try to critise someone,,anyway sorry if it means critism for you
but as you said you used words like contradicted and patronsiing in this post for halvo,,,,its some thing personal and avoidable
so pls avoid this in forums
you can message users in person in such cases
thanks
but as you said you used words like contradicted and patronsiing in this post for halvo,,,,its some thing personal and avoidable
so pls avoid this in forums
you can message users in person in such cases
thanks
No sorry, if someone has contradicted themselves, I am entitled to clarify.
If someone has been deliberately patronising, I am entitled to object, especially if that patronage was born of their own error in communication, not mine.
I have discussed according to the principles of debate on this thread, as I was taught to do at university.
------ This thread is Archived ------
classicboy: might be my words reflect that,,yes i its not my native language,,i t did not try to critise someone,,anyway sorry if it means critism for you
but as you said you used words like contradicted and patronsiing in this post for halvo,,,,its some thing personal and avoidable
so pls avoid this in forums
you can message users in person in such cases
thanks
but as you said you used words like contradicted and patronsiing in this post for halvo,,,,its some thing personal and avoidable
so pls avoid this in forums
you can message users in person in such cases
thanks
No sorry, if someone has contradicted themselves, I am entitled to clarify.
If someone has been deliberately patronising, I am entitled to object, especially if that patronage was born of their own error in communication, not mine.
I have discussed according to the principles of debate on this thread, as I was taught to do at university.
------ This thread is Archived ------
jac379: No sorry, if someone has contradicted themselves, I am entitled to clarify.
If someone has been deliberately patronising, I am entitled to object, especially if that patronage was born of their own error in communication, not mine.
I have discussed according to the principles of debate on this thread, as I was taught to do at university.
If someone has been deliberately patronising, I am entitled to object, especially if that patronage was born of their own error in communication, not mine.
I have discussed according to the principles of debate on this thread, as I was taught to do at university.
i would say be careful and avoid but if you wanna apply uni rules then apply it again with care please
anyway you r welcome in my posts
thanks
------ This thread is Archived ------
I do apply debate techniques with care, that's why I ask for clarification.
If you make assumptions about what a person means and get it wrong, its a false line of debate and therefore useless.
For example, if someone says they will only wait 6 months, its not unreasonable to ask what action they will take if the period of separation goes on for more than six months.
If they answer that they will wait some more, its not unreasonable to ask why they said they're limit is six months, if it not.
Its simply following the logic of the argument.
Given that setting a time limit for waiting that will not be adhered to is seemingly pointless, I'm wondering what function does that time limit serve?
It could be that setting limits breaks down the waiting time into manageable pieces, it could be that the time limit is about reviewing the viability of the relationship, but stating that on a public forum without clarification could send the message to a loved one that if things are not sorted in 6 months time, they relationship will be over. This could leave someone wondering how committed someone is to the relationship, if they're on a timer. It could effect their willingness to commit.
I think its important to communicate accurately with ones partner, especially if there is a distance involved.
If you make assumptions about what a person means and get it wrong, its a false line of debate and therefore useless.
For example, if someone says they will only wait 6 months, its not unreasonable to ask what action they will take if the period of separation goes on for more than six months.
If they answer that they will wait some more, its not unreasonable to ask why they said they're limit is six months, if it not.
Its simply following the logic of the argument.
Given that setting a time limit for waiting that will not be adhered to is seemingly pointless, I'm wondering what function does that time limit serve?
It could be that setting limits breaks down the waiting time into manageable pieces, it could be that the time limit is about reviewing the viability of the relationship, but stating that on a public forum without clarification could send the message to a loved one that if things are not sorted in 6 months time, they relationship will be over. This could leave someone wondering how committed someone is to the relationship, if they're on a timer. It could effect their willingness to commit.
I think its important to communicate accurately with ones partner, especially if there is a distance involved.
------ This thread is Archived ------
This Thread is Archived
This Thread is archived, so you will no longer be able to post to it. Threads get archived automatically when they are older than 3 months.
« Go back to All Threads
« Go back to All Threads
More Threads
Don Shits-In-Pants!!!
the way you look
Sleepy Don!
Common Issues with the BMW X1
other can see but not you
Happy Birthday MysteriousGirl80
rarotonga
wanting beyond need
Feel Good Music
The Best of the GOP
More Threads
Report threads that break rules, are offensive, or contain fighting. Staff may not be aware of the forum abuse, and cannot do anything about it unless you tell us about it. click to report forum abuse »
If one of the comments is offensive, please report the comment instead (there is a link in each comment to report it).
If one of the comments is offensive, please report the comment instead (there is a link in each comment to report it).
Can you love the person without them physically being at your side is really the question. My answer is yes.