Transfering to Georgetown!

Colleges and Universities A-Z Georgetown University
41

<p>UMICH10, in all honesty (and contrary to majority opinion), I do think you'd be one to survive four-years at West Point/Annapolis. (By the way, the service requirement for West Point is actually eight years, five in active duty and three in the reserve... which nowadays...) </p>

<p>Congratulations on your acceptance to Annapolis, although I am a bit curious as to why the admission offer came a bit late. Unless my timetable for Annapolis is skewed, in which case, mea culpa.</p>

<p>A career in the Law is definitely possible via West Point and the USNA. Lawyers with a military background are usually more disciplined and better acquainted with the regulations that encompass the entirety of our judicial system. A few military officers who enter into Law School enter into the JAG Corps upon graduation, an option I hope you'll consider.</p>

<p>Having said that, I think you have a glorified vision of two things: 1) what the environment of the Corps will be like and 2) the legal environment (I'm guessing criminal/civil law) in which you are preparing yourself to enter. </p>

<p>Backtracking a bit, ** IF ** you complete your training at USNA or USMA, should you choose to select that route, I don't think you will be an "inferior" officer. Part of the training of the Corps requires you to acknowledge that -- you may dislike a duty or a responsibility, but you are in no position to neglect it. You complete a task, no matter how much or how little you like it. (Well, unless you're told to perform illegal activities, then you're authorized by the UCMJ to disobey).</p>

<p>I do think that if you choose such an option, West Point or the USNA will transform you into an officer willing to serve above and beyond the required term of service, provided you complete your training at one of these two very fine institutions. I don't think it would be the best choice given your desire to enter into a legal career (Georgetown or one of the Ivies would be better suited for that); however, it is up to you.</p>

<p>P.S. Inexistent is a word.</p>

42

<p>JAG or military law is only a viable option if you are found medically unqualified for active warfare. Same thing for intelligence. It's not like medical field where they pick elite few to go to med school even if they're physically qualified to serve.
I honestly do not know how you were picked for USNA class of 2010. You have had to have a nomination in order to get a nomination and since you applied for USNA c/o 2011, you wouldn't have been considered until next year. Even so, the traditional notification from USNA is generally early May.
Regardless, I hope if you do enter as 4/c midn this year, your ultimate goal would be in serving the country as a military officer. USNA gives you a lot of opportunities although the career fields are quite limited. Good luck.</p>

43

<p>
[quote]
P.S. Inexistent is a word.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Not according to the Oxford English/American Dictionary, which is more respected than Marriam-Webster.</p>

44

<p>
[quote]
</p>

<p>Not according to the Oxford English/American Dictionary, which is more respected than Marriam-Webster. </p>

<p>

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Well, the English counterpart of the OAD (2nd ed.) thinks it is.</p>

45

<p>
[quote]
Well, the English counterpart of the OAD (2nd ed.) thinks it is.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Of course, there is no real decider on what is a word and what is not by any ultimate authority; however, in these cases, we can rely on the opinion of the majority:</p>

<p>Hits for "inexistent" on google: 596,000
Hits for "nonexistent" on google: 14,400,000</p>

<p>A landslide, and another win for prescriptivism.</p>

46

<p>... If you're arguing that the "popular" form of a word precludes the possibility of other versions being legitimate, then that's just flawed logic right there.</p>

<p>I personally use nonexistent, but for the sake of argument and sheer boredom...</p>

47

<p>
[quote]
... If you're arguing that the "popular" form of a word precludes the possibility of other versions being legitimate, then that's just flawed logic right there.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>How is that "flawed logic"? Which fallacy am I committing?</p>

<p>Certainly not ad populum. I am making an evaluative judgment, not a factual one (or a truth-functional one).</p>

48

<p>No, try Argumentum ad Google. :-)</p>

49

<p>
[quote]
It is a special case of the Argumentum ad populum fallacy.
[edit]

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Once again:</p>

<p>
[quote]
Certainly not ad populum. I am making an evaluative judgment, not a factual one (or a truth-functional one).

[/quote]
</p>

50

<p>Ohhh Georgetown.</p>

51

<p>wow that argument was so ridiculous.....</p>