Trump Threatens to Kill All Hamas

5 October 2025, by Eric Zuesse. (All of my recent articles can be seen here.)

On October 5th, CNN headlined “Trump says Hamas faces ‘complete obliteration’ if it insists on staying in power”, and reported “‘Complete Obliteration!’ Trump told CNN’s Jake Tapper when asked via text message on Saturday what would happen if Hamas insists on staying in power.”

On October 4th, Mario Nawfal headlined “SCOTT RITTER & IDF’s [Jonathan] CONRICUS ON TRUMP’S HUGE ISRAEL-HAMAS DEAL”, and here is the opening of Nawfal’s interview of Ritter:

0:34

NAWFAL: Scott, what’s your initial reaction [to Trump’s 20-point peace plan]? Is it as optimistic as

0:37

a lot of people online or are you a bit more skeptical? RITTER: No, I’m very skeptical. I was skeptical

0:42

the moment Trump issued the 20-point peace plan because it’s just unrealistic. I mean, um, it’s predicated

0:49

on Hamas agreeing to dissolve. Um, and this is Hamas who, by the way, you know, there’s a reason why there’s a 20-point

0:56

peace plan put out by Trump. It’s that Israel can’t finish the job militarily. Um, and every day we see another one,

1:02

two Israeli tanks being blown up, their crews being killed, Israelis being sniped. Um, Hamas is destroying the

1:09

Israeli military, death by a thousand cuts. And Israel doesn’t have what it takes to defeat Hamas. They can kill a

1:16

lot of Palestinians. They’ve proven that. But they can’t win. Uh, and so Trump has intervened here. Um, but it’s

1:24

not going to work because Israel has put forward um demands that simply can’t be

1:29

met by Hamas and won’t be met by Hamas. Um, I’m

1:34

concerned that Trump doesn’t have what it takes to put pressure on Israel to, to get Israel to, you know, agree fully.

1:42

Um, I think we’re going to see some um some gamesmanship um as Israel tries to get the hostages

1:49

released and maybe they’ll release uh Palestinians that they hold prison prisoner. But then to move on to the

1:55

next step, which requires the dissolution of Hamas, is is unacceptable.

2:02

And I think we also should point out that Islamic Jihad has agreed to Hamas’s conditions. And this is very important

2:08

because Islamic Jihad is a more hardline organization and the fact that they’ve

2:13

signed on, you know, puts pressure on Trump because there is actually a chance here to have a comprehensive peace. But

2:20

it requires Hamas being recognized as a legitimate um authority within the

2:26

Palestinian community that has the right to represent the Palestinian people. And as things stand, Israel simply won’t

2:34

allow that. NAWFAL: Agree. I think this is the main sticking point cuz everyone’s excited that Hamas has agreed to release the hostages. But

2:40

most people don’t know that Hamas has agreed on multiple occasions to release the hostages as long as Israel pulls out. That was the one of their main

2:46

requests. The war ends, the aid comes in. These are the same conditions in this peace plan by Trump. Now, the

2:51

difference here is there is a request for Hamas to disarm. Hamas did not respond to this whatsoever, which kind

2:57

of implies that they’re not going to accept. It’s a very fair concern. you know, they they require I think they

3:03

previously hinted that they could disarm. One could even argue they’ve hinted more previously than they did in

3:09

this response. They could disarm if there is a a a two-state solution or at least a path to to a two-state solution.

3:15

It wasn’t an explicit agreement, but there were hints that this is there’s there’s a possibility there. In this

3:20

response, they haven’t mentioned it at all. I’ve got the response here. We’ll go through it in a bit, Scott, but I haven’t mentioned it at all. And lastly,

3:26

there’s one request by Trump and Israel is that Hamas has no future role in governing Gaza. Now, Hamas has agreed

3:34

for a transitional technocratic Palestinian committee um to administer the country for the region for 5 to 10

3:40

years overseen by an international border peace chaireed by Trump. They

3:45

agreed to that, but they also hinted that they want to it’s very vague, but they hinted they want to play a part in

3:51

that. I think this one I’m more optimistic they reach some sort of agreement for this one. Scott, I’m a lot

3:56

more concerned about Hamas disarming completely and there’s even been discussions of a split within Hamas,

4:02

which we’ll discuss shortly. But your concern seems to be very similar. They they will not disarm. Do you think

4:07

there’s any conditions they will disarm? RITTER: Well, I actually do believe I mean the fact that Hamas has put it on the table

4:14

in the past. Um but the conditions are Israel won’t ever agree to these

4:20

conditions. Um you know, right now, let’s just be honest. Hamas has fought

4:25

the Israeli army to a standstill. That’s why there’s negotiations. If Hamas was beatable, defeatable, we wouldn’t be

4:32

here. Um, and so now ask yourself, what happens to the Palestinians if Hamas

4:40

disarms? Who will protect the Palestinians against an Israeli threat? The Israelis have said there are no red

4:46

lines. There are no red lines. Meaning they will hunt down, kill, do whatever they want to do where anytime, anywhere

4:54

um as they see fit. They’re a literally a lawless organization, self-admitted. So now you’re in Hamas’s shoes and uh a

5:02

condition for peace is to totally disarm. Who will guarantee the security of the Palestinian people if not Hamas?

5:09

And it can’t be Israel and it can’t be the United States. It can’t be any party uh to the conflict. Um, if there was a

5:17

mechanism in place that could provide real security guarantees, real like if

5:24

Israel bombs Hamas, Israel gets blown off the face of the earth kind of guarantees, you know, real deterrence,

5:30

um, then I could see Hamas saying we’ll we will disarm. Um, they say a two-state

5:36

solution, but you know, one of the things about a two-state solution is that the Palestinian state would have a

5:42

legitimate right of self-defense. That’s something that the Israelis have always said, “Nah, you can have a Palestinian

5:47

state, but you can’t have a Palestinian army.” Um, this is just totally unrealistic. Uh, and until Israel

5:53

changes its stance, uh, I don’t see any progress being made there. But I I am

5:59

optimistic. Again, what Hamas has done here is very clever, um, you know, to agree to this Palestinian structure of

6:07

technocrats, but to say we need to play a role because what this does is it

6:13

legitimizes Hamas politically and in the long term Hamas will become a dominant

6:19

political power under this structure, and people should not be afraid of this because actually when resistance groups

6:28

take over political responsibilities they actually moderate. Look at Hezbollah uh Hezbollah and Lebanon. They

6:35

are part of the government and as a result of the part of the government, they are responsive to the needs, wants

6:40

and desires of the Lebanese population. If Hamas is allowed to, you know, grow

6:46

as a political movement and be, end its term as a resistance movement, I think

6:53

it can be a responsible part of, you know, the future of of of Gaza, of

7:00

Palestine. And it must be, because they have established credentials that nobody else in the Palestinian community has to

7:06

stand up for Palestinian state. Let’s be frank. There wouldn’t be discussion of a Palestinian state today if it weren’t for Hamas.

7:13

7:13

…

[From 33:00 till end at 73:00, there’s a debate between the pro-Israeli Conricus versus the anti-Israeli Ritter.]

——

MY COMMENT: Trump’s statement on October 5th means that he will now take over the job that Netanyahu has been promising to do but failed to do: eliminate Hamas. The international reputation that Israel has, is going to become now the international reputation that America has. But will the international courts then open a case against Trump, as they did against Netanyahu? Or is America above international law — not subject to it, at all?

—————

Investigative historian Eric Zuesse’s latest book, AMERICA’S EMPIRE OF EVIL: Hitler’s Posthumous Victory, and Why the Social Sciences Need to Change, is about how America took over the world after World War II in order to enslave it to U.S.-and-allied billionaires. Their cartels extract the world’s wealth by control of not only their ‘news’ media but the social ‘sciences’ — duping the public.