3 ms·
Ziel is literally a target, but in truth it translates as "destination". "Angriffsziel" could be translated as "target" in this sense, so Stephan is not wrong
by Vivtek 13y ago
Ziel is literally a target, but in truth it translates as "destination". "Angriffsziel" could be translated as "target" in this sense, so Stephan is not wrong - but perhaps soft-pedaling a little. Where you're right is that "Angriff" ("attack") makes "Angriffsziel" sufficiently explicit in its connotation of a military target. I'd consider "target of attack" in that "Angriff" doesn't necessarily connote a military attack, but could also imply, say, a hacking attack.
Maybe "country of interest"?
- onli 13y agoZiel is both, it can mean target and destination. In that case, it is more of a target (attack destination? na, the NSA is not currently in an airplane flying into battle). > Maybe "country of interest"? Yeah maybe, but that sounds a bit harmless, doesn't it?
- Vivtek 13y agoIt does sound harmless, which is why it's the Orwell-approved nomenclature. In fifty years it won't sound at all harmless, and there will be a new euphemism. "Attack destination" made me smile. The English word destination doesn't work like that, but maybe it should.