A false analogy is when the similarity in one respect of two concepts is taken as sufficient to establish that they are similar in another respect in which they are in fact dissimilar. 

It seems that you were under the impression that a false analogy is one in which the things being compared do not share the similarity. That would be a disanalogy.

If you were trying to show that this is a disanalogy, you would merely have to show how Zille saying things that offend people about infrastructure gains from colonialism is not similar to Americans saying things that may offend people about their ill-begotten gains from Nazi scientists during Operation Paperclip.

I'm not sure what one would call it when one focuses on the dissimilar aspects, which were not relevant to the analogy, like value judgements concerning the Space Race, and then claiming the analogy doesn't hold, despite acknowledging the similar aspects, upon which an analogy rests.