The definition of analogy is....
Update 1
Ken responds to a Letter writer in the Concord Monitor here. Spotting another Letter supporting him here, he continues
Thank you, Ms. Fallon. You clearly understand the situation far better than Kenneth Joop of Concord. He writes a letter in the Sunday Monitor that reads, in part:
It is difficult for me to conceive of anyone supporting Israel's devastation of Lebanon. We are often cited various Muslim groups who wish to wipe Israel off the map. Israel is in no danger of being wiped off the map, although this is not necessarily true of Palestine.Israel is fighting against a deadly terrorist organization whose leader states flatly that his goal is the destruction of the state of Israel, a UN member state. Arab nations have tried to conquer Israel in conventional war since its establishment. Now they use terrorist proxies. Using conventional arms, these groups can not destroy Israel. But a nuclear-armed Iran will pose a mortal threat. Does Mr. Joop really believe that the Jewish state could survive a nuclear detonation in Tel Aviv? Death, destruction, refugees, economic chaos - the land would not be "wiped off the map," but the nation would be.
And what, exactly, is the "Palestine" to which Mr. Joop refers? A segment of the old Ottoman Empire? The post World War I British administrative region called the Mandate of Palestine, which included the modern Kingdom of Jordan? The Palestinian Authority has not earned statehood.
Israel has a right to defend itself, even if that means attacking a terrorist enemy that is interwoven with a civilian population. The Allies destroyed Germany and Japan to win World War II, killing many civilians, many children. Such is the nature of war. If southern Lebanon must be destroyed in order to eradicate Hezbollah, so be it.
============================================
(Sometimes, people just don't do their homework - both in the historical sense and in the literary sense. Ken gets a "twofer" with this one -Skip)
Double standard, JULIE LANOCHA , Hopkinton - Letter to The Concord Monitor July 23. 2006 10:00AM
Despite the sympathies anyone might have for the Jews following the atrocities of World War II, the fact is they had no more right to be in Palestine than the British to be in Northern Ireland.
To put the current hostilities into perspective, if England had responded to the kidnapping of two soldiers by the IRA with the bombing of Irish villages, destroying hospitals, bridges, airports, killing hundreds of civilians, cutting off water and electricity, how would the international community respond?
If I recall correctly, there was a very active IRA sympathizer community in the United States raising money and providing support to this terrorist group. I don't remember an enraged U.S. populace calling for the terrorists to be stopped, for the bloodshed to end, for all means necessary to be put to use to stop the menace.
Why the difference?
JULIE LANOCHA
Here's my response: No Analogy
An effective argument from analogy must meet two requirements:
1) the similarities between two things must be pertinent; and 2), the analogy must not ignore pertinent dissimilarities. In trying to draw an analogy between the current Middle East crisis and British actions in Northern Ireland, the author of the letter “Double Standard” (23 July) fails on both counts.
Jews as a culture and a religion lived in a wide swath of the eastern Mediterranean region centuries before Christ was crucified or Mohammed was born. There were Jewish states in this region long before the time we now call the Common Era, but over the centuries the area was controlled by many different rulers from many different political entities spread from Europe to Egypt to Persia. Muslims didn’t come into the picture until the 600s C.E. Most importantly, “Palestinian” in the current sense of the word was not, historically, a unique demographic group; it is, rather, a recent creation.
There are no relevant similarities between the current Middle East crisis and Britain’s troubles in Northern Ireland – which, from the 1920’s has been a recognized part of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. To attempt an analogy shows a gross lack of historical perspective that constraints of space do not allow me to properly address.
Israel should not have to justify its right to exist: Jews have lived in that region for millennia and the state of Israel was formed by international consensus through a United Nations resolution in 1947. The democratically-elected government of Israel comports itself far better than many UN member states. Israel has every right under international law to defend itself against terrorist aggression, and deserves our continued support in the global fight against Islamic terrorist organizations.
Jews as a culture and a religion lived in a wide swath of the eastern Mediterranean region centuries before Christ was crucified or Mohammed was born. There were Jewish states in this region long before the time we now call the Common Era, but over the centuries the area was controlled by many different rulers from many different political entities spread from Europe to Egypt to Persia. Muslims didn’t come into the picture until the 600s C.E. Most importantly, “Palestinian” in the current sense of the word was not, historically, a unique demographic group; it is, rather, a recent creation.
There are no relevant similarities between the current Middle East crisis and Britain’s troubles in Northern Ireland – which, from the 1920’s has been a recognized part of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. To attempt an analogy shows a gross lack of historical perspective that constraints of space do not allow me to properly address.
Israel should not have to justify its right to exist: Jews have lived in that region for millennia and the state of Israel was formed by international consensus through a United Nations resolution in 1947. The democratically-elected government of Israel comports itself far better than many UN member states. Israel has every right under international law to defend itself against terrorist aggression, and deserves our continued support in the global fight against Islamic terrorist organizations.
