The president’s statement on Tuesday, when asked about a press conference given the day before by Rashida Tlaib and Ilhan Omar, has caused some strong reactions in the press and on social media. Perhaps it should be quoted in full:

Five years ago, the concept of even talking about this, even three years ago, of cutting off aid to Israel because of two people that hate Israel and hate Jewish people—I can’t even believe we’re having this conversation. Where has the Democratic party gone? Where have they gone that they’re defending these two people over the state of Israel? And I think any Jewish people that vote for a Democrat, I think it shows either a great lack of knowledge or a great disloyalty.

Ruthie Blum comments:

Contrary to the outcry on the part of his critics, Trump was not accusing Jews of being disloyal to America, but rather to themselves. . . . In other words, he was expressing shock and disappointment that Jews would willingly betray their own interests. In his eyes, this means that they must be ignorant of the direction in which the party they overwhelmingly support has been going. If not, they appear to be purposely sabotaging U.S. relations with the single state established in their ancestral homeland to protect their people, which serves as America’s buffer against hostile, anti-democratic forces in the volatile, strategically important region.

Here is what he doesn’t grasp: only a handful of non-Orthodox Jews vote Republican; the rest pray at the altar of the Democratic party, no matter what, even when the party turns against Israel. This apparent oddity spurred my father, Norman Podhoretz—a lifelong liberal Democrat who became a conservative Republican—to write an entire book examining the phenomenon.

And since most Jews didn’t vote for Trump last time, nor will they next year, the hysteria about his “disloyalty” comments—which were aimed as a wake-up call to an electoral sector that wants to stay asleep—will have little effect.

On Tuesday, a Hizballah drone attack injured three people in northern Israel. The next day, another attack, targeting an IDF base, injured eighteen people, six of them seriously, in Arab al-Amshe, also in the north. This second attack involved the simultaneous use of drones carrying explosives and guided antitank missiles. In both cases, the defensive systems that performed so successfully last weekend failed to stop the drones and missiles. Ron Ben-Yishai has a straightforward explanation as to why: the Lebanon-backed terrorist group is getting better at evading Israel defenses. He explains the three basis systems used to pilot these unmanned aircraft, and their practical effects:

These systems allow drones to act similarly to fighter jets, using “dead zones”—areas not visible to radar or other optical detection—to approach targets. They fly low initially, then ascend just before crashing and detonating on the target. The terrain of southern Lebanon is particularly conducive to such attacks.

But this requires skills that the terror group has honed over months of fighting against Israel. The latest attacks involved a large drone capable of carrying over 50 kg (110 lbs.) of explosives. The terrorists have likely analyzed Israel’s alert and interception systems, recognizing that shooting down their drones requires early detection to allow sufficient time for launching interceptors.

The IDF tries to detect any incoming drones on its radar, as it had done prior to the war. Despite Hizballah’s learning curve, the IDF’s technological edge offers an advantage. However, the military must recognize that any measure it takes is quickly observed and analyzed, and even the most effective defenses can be incomplete. The terrain near the Lebanon-Israel border continues to pose a challenge, necessitating technological solutions and significant financial investment.