On May 1, 2003, when US President Bush announced the end of the Iraq war on the aircraft carrier “” on board, he officially classified the Iraq war as an integral part of the war on terrorism and claimed that the Iraq war was only an important part of the US comprehensive war on terrorism.

He made it clear that the Iraq war was only “an important part of the broader war on terror to pursue and suppress al Qaeda and other terrorists.

The defeat of Saddam Hussein is actually the defeat of Al Qaeda and terrorists”.

Bush also used strong words to warn any lawless country related to terrorist organizations and trying to possess weapons of mass destruction that they pose a serious threat to the civilized world and will be punished.

Obviously, Bush’s speech refers to something, intended to directly warn Iran and other countries, and hinted that if they dare to emulate Iraq, the United States will also dare to take military action against them.

So, Uncle Sam, who has always been good at making enemies, who is the next target to attack? At present, Iran and North Korea are the most violent quarrels with the United States.

Both of them have attracted the attention of the United States and the international community because of the nuclear issue, and continue to challenge the United States on the nuclear issue.

In order to prevent the two countries from possessing nuclear weapons, the United States has threatened to use force against them.

Rumsfeld warned Iran: “as long as military and intelligence personnel not under the direct command of general Franks enter Iraq, they will be regarded as a potential threat to the coalition forces.

This also includes the military organization ‘full moon army’ of the Supreme Council of the Islamic revolution in Iraq in Iran.

Iran is interfering in Iraq’s internal affairs by supporting the ‘full moon army’.

” In fact, this is a clear threat to Syria and Iran.

If the two countries do not converge, the United States will take action.

According to some media reports, the United States has made a military plan to attack Iran, and the U.S. military will launch an attack on Iran from military bases in Iraq, Georgia and Azerbaijan.

The disclosure of this plan shocked the Arab world and increased doubts about the control of the Arab world by the United States.

Iran quickly reacted strongly to the accusations and practices of the United States.

On the second day of Rumsfeld’s speech, representative ramazanza, a spokesman for the Iranian government, said that the United States mobilized troops from the other side of the earth to interfere in Iraq’s internal affairs, but accused the Iraqi opposition of interfering in its own country’s internal affairs.

Iran was surprised by this practice of the United States.

On the issue of Iraq, Iran will not support any party involved in this meaningless war.

Iran’s border is closed to all troops.

With the prominence of Iran’s nuclear issue in recent years, the United States and other western countries have increased pressure on Iran, and the United States even threatened to carry out military strikes on Iran’s nuclear facilities.

Iran began its nuclear energy development activities in the 1950s and has received the support of the United States and other western countries.

After breaking off diplomatic relations with the United States in 1980, the United States has repeatedly accused Iran of secretly developing nuclear weapons under the cover of “peaceful use of nuclear energy” and adopted a “containment” policy.

In early 2003, after Iran announced that it had discovered and refined uranium that could provide fuel for its nuclear power plant, Iran’s nuclear energy development plan was “seriously questioned” by the United States.

Uranium enrichment technology is a sensitive technology prohibited by the international community. U.S. military experts believe that Iran’s possession of enriched uranium means that it has nuclear weapons.

Therefore, the U.S. government requires Iran to stop uranium enrichment related activities and threatens to submit the Iranian nuclear issue to the UN Security Council for consideration in order to impose sanctions on Iran.

The International Atomic Energy Agency has also adopted a number of relevant resolutions requiring Iran to cooperate with it, sign the additional protocol to the Treaty on the non proliferation of nuclear weapons, allow the International Atomic Energy Agency to carry out more stringent surprise inspections and terminate uranium enrichment tests.

With the active mediation of the international community, especially France, Germany and Britain on behalf of the European Union, Iran has taken a series of positive measures to solve the nuclear issue.

On December 18, 2003, Iran officially signed the additional protocol to the Treaty on the non proliferation of nuclear weapons.

In April 2004, Iran announced a moratorium on the assembly of uranium enrichment centrifuges.

At the end of June 2004, Iran announced that it would resume the assembly of uranium enrichment centrifuges while suspending uranium enrichment activities without persuading the International Atomic Energy Agency to end the verification of its nuclear facilities.

Despite the resolution adopted by the board of Governors of the International Atomic Energy Agency on September 18, Iran is required to suspend all activities related to uranium enrichment before November 25.

However, Iran made it clear that it would not terminate uranium enrichment activities and announced on September 21 that it had begun to use part of 37 tons of uranium “yellow cake” (uranium ore) for uranium conversion tests.

In order to persuade Iran to completely terminate uranium enrichment activities, Germany, France and Britain held several rounds of talks with Iran.

In early November 2004, the two sides reached a preliminary agreement in Paris.

The three countries promised to provide Iran with a light water reactor, nuclear fuel and nuclear technology, and will help Iran in economic and trade cooperation.

On November 22, Iran announced the suspension of all activities related to uranium enrichment.

On the 29th, the board of Governors of the International Atomic Energy Agency adopted a resolution not to refer the Iranian nuclear issue to the UN Security Council.

However, Iran has always insisted that the suspension of uranium enrichment is only temporary.

In order to discuss the implementation of the Paris Agreement, Iran and Germany, France and Britain have held many rounds of negotiations since December 2004, but the two sides have been unable to reach agreement on key issues.

At the end of May 2005, the two sides reached an agreement.

The EU said it would propose a comprehensive plan within two months to promote cooperation with Iran in the field of technology and nuclear energy and further solve the Iranian nuclear issue.

On August 5, Germany, Britain and France, on behalf of the European Union, submitted a package of proposals to Iran to solve the Iranian nuclear issue.

Iran called the proposal “unacceptable”.

On August 8, Iran resumed uranium conversion activities in Isfahan.

To this end, the board of Governors of the International Atomic Energy Agency held an emergency meeting on August 9 and adopted a resolution by consensus on August 11, requiring Iran to immediately stop all nuclear activities related to uranium enrichment and continue negotiations with the EU on its nuclear issue, but Iran refused.

Negotiations between Iran and the European Union on the nuclear issue have reached an impasse.

On September 17, when addressing the 60th UN General Assembly, Iranian President Ahmadinejad reiterated his consistent position of adhering to the peaceful use of nuclear energy and put forward a series of suggestions on solving the Iranian nuclear issue, including inviting foreign companies to participate in the country’s uranium enrichment program, so as to maximize the transparency of the program.

Germany, France and BritainThere is a huge gap in the position of “building light water reactor”.

In addition, the U.S. Congress also opposes the aid to the construction of North Korea’s light water reactor.

Hadley, the national security adviser to the U.S. president, also made it clear that even if North Korea gives up nuclear weapons, the normalization of U.S. – North Korean relations can only be considered after the settlement of human rights, missiles and other issues.

On November 22, 2005, under the leadership of the United States, the Korean Peninsula Energy Development Organization officially announced the suspension of the construction of the Korean light water reactor.

On November 28, the DPRK Foreign Ministry said that due to the announcement by the Korean Peninsula Energy Development Organization to stop the construction of light water reactors, the DPRK US nuclear framework agreement has been completely destroyed, and the DPRK has suffered huge economic losses.

The DPRK will pursue the responsibility of completely tearing up the DPRK US nuclear framework agreement with the United States and ask the United States for compensation for political and economic losses.

At present, the issue of light water reactor has become a new point of contention between the United States and North Korea, and neither side shows any sign of concession.

According to the consensus in the joint statement of the fourth round of six-party talks on “holding the fifth round of six-party talks in Beijing in early November 2005”, the first phase of the fifth round of six-party talks was held in Beijing from November 9 to 11.

Before the meeting, the DPRK put forward a new five step “road map” for abandoning nuclear weapons, that is, the DPRK stops nuclear testing, avoids nuclear transfer, stops manufacturing new nuclear weapons, stops nuclear activities and abandons nuclear weapons, returns to the Treaty on the non proliferation of nuclear weapons and accepts international verification.

At the same time, North Korea has also put forward a series of conditions for the implementation of the “road map” for abandoning nuclear weapons: the denuclearization of South Korea has been confirmed through international verification, relevant countries have made a guarantee not to carry out nuclear attack on North Korea, and the United States has given up its nuclear protection to South Korea and stopped its nuclear activities in the region.

The United States, Japan and other countries are unwilling to implement the principle of simultaneous action of “commitment to commitment and action to action” determined in the fourth round of joint statement, and still emphasize that North Korea should make concessions first.

As the positions of the two sides are still opposed and neither side is willing to make easy concessions, the first phase of the fifth round of six-party talks has made no progress in implementing the joint statement of the fourth round of six-party talks.

After the meeting, a brief presidential statement was issued, reiterating some basic principles identified in the fourth round of the six-party talks.

On October 21, 2005, under the pretext of being suspected of “counterfeiting currency” and “engaging in illegal trade”, the United States announced financial sanctions against eight North Korean companies and frozen the assets of these enterprises in the United States.

In this regard, the spokesman of the DPRK Foreign Ministry said: “the DPRK verified the so-called ‘information’ proposed by the United States and found that the ‘information’ was completely fabricated” and “the DPRK has neither forged currency nor engaged in illegal trade”.

The spokesman said that various actions show that the United States has no intention of resolving the DPRK nuclear issue through dialogue and is violating the basic principles established in the joint statement of the six-party talks one by one.

While speeding up the preparation for a nuclear attack on the DPRK, the United States maliciously slandered the DPRK in order to “promote the DPRK not to participate in the six-party talks through rumor and slander”, so as to completely paralyze the talks.

Kim Kye Kwan, head of the DPRK delegation to the six-party talks, also said that the financial sanctions are contrary to the joint statement of the fourth round of the six-party talks and hinder the implementation of the joint statement.

He said: “we agreed to participate in the six-party talks because the United States has stopped its hostile policy towards the DPRK and is willing to coexist peacefully with the DPRK.

” However, the United States believes that the implementation of financial sanctions against North Korean companies is a matter between the United States and North Korea, has nothing to do with the six-party talks and should not affect the holding of the six-party talks.

The DPRK said that the United States had agreed to visit the United States with Kim Kye Kwan, head of the DPRK six-party talks delegation, to discuss and resolve relevant disputes with hill, head of the US six-party talks delegation, on the issue of financial sanctions.

However, before Kim Kye Kwan left, the United States informed the DPRK that it could only talk with lower-level officials of the United States, and the DPRK believed that low-level officials could not solve the problem at all, Therefore, Jin Guiguan’s plan to visit the United States was cancelled.

Therefore, North Korea believes that the fundamental reason for the financial sanctions against North Korean enterprises is that the United States does not recognize the North Korean regime, which shows that the United States is still hostile to North Korea and is unwilling to give up its hostile policy towards North Korea.

Under such circumstances, even if we participate in the six-party talks, no real progress will be made.

At present, the DPRK emphasizes that it will not participate in the six-party talks until the issue of financial sanctions imposed by the United States on DPRK companies is resolved.

In early July 2006, the DPRK launched several missiles into the sea of Japan, which made the DPRK more isolated.

There is no sign that significant progress may be made on the North Korean nuclear issue.

At present, a considerable part of the attention of the United States is involved in the Iranian nuclear issue, the Iraqi issue, the Palestinian Israeli and Lebanese Israeli issues, and it is difficult to devote all its efforts to the settlement of the DPRK nuclear issue.

Because of this, coupled with the strong military capability of the DPRK and the geographical factors of the Korean Peninsula, the United States cannot launch a military attack on the DPRK as rashly as it treats Iraq, Not to mention the war against North Korea.

A few years later, after stabilizing Iraq and resolving the Iranian issue, if the DPRK does not return to the six-party talks under various pretexts, fails to make progress on the nuclear issue, or even intensifies its missile test and underground nuclear test, the United States is entirely possible to carry out a military attack on the DPRK.

In addition to Iran and North Korea, there are Cuba, Syria, Libya, Iraq and Sudan.

These seven countries are what Bush called the “axis of evil” in 2002.

So who will be the next target? Cuba: the United States has been trying to subvert Cuba for decades.

After the Spanish American war in 1898, the United States seized the opportunity to occupy Cuba and gained control over Cuba.

In 1901, the United States forcibly incorporated the Pratt amendment into the Cuban constitution.

In fact, the United States has the right to intervene in order to protect Cuba’s independence.

Cuba gained nominal independence in 1902.

Guantanamo Bay and Guantanamo Bay, two of which are still occupied by the United States in 1903.

In 1906, the United States occupied Cuba for the second time for three years.

The United States also conducted two military interventions against Cuba in 1912 and 1917.

Although the government abolished the Pratt amendment in 1934, Cuba’s dependence on the United States has not weakened at all.

Since then, until the victory of the Cuban revolution, the United States took full control of Cuba and repeatedly brutally suppressed the struggle of the Cuban people for independence.

On January 1, 1959, Castro led the Cuban revolution to victory, began to recover state power, exercise state sovereignty and nationalize the economy, which touched the interests of the United States.

In particular, Cuba is in the Caribbean, which the United States regards as its backyardThe establishment of a socialist regime has made the United States a bone in the throat.

For decades, it has been financing the opposition and exiles on the pretext of democracy and human rights.

Syria: on March 28, 2003, when the Iraq war was in full swing, US Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld strongly accused Syria at a news conference held by the Pentagon: “our intelligence shows that there are exchanges of arms, equipment and personnel between Syria and Iraq, including night vision and other equipment, which makes the situation more complicated.

” In December 2002, Israeli Prime Minister Sharon accused Syria that Iraq had transferred chemical or biological weapons to Syria.

According to the Daily Telegraph of April 8, 2003, a Bush administration official said that important equipment, including expertise, may have been transferred, and there were signs of such transfer as early as August and September 2002.

Iraqi nuclear scientists are likely to go to Syria, where Saddam’s regime may have retained some troops.

The US accusations against Syria are still escalating.

A few days later, on April 14, White House spokesman Fleischer said: “Syria is a real rogue country”, adding that “Syria does host terrorists and Syria is a terrorist state”, “if Syria provides a shelter for Saddam Hussein’s senior officials, the United States will not sit idly by”.

A report submitted by the US Central Intelligence Agency to the US Congress shows that Syria has been trying to build an arsenal including sarin gas.

Rumsfeld even said that Syria has conducted experiments related to chemical agents in the past 12 to 15 months.

“US intelligence shows that some Iraqis are allowed to sneak into Syria.

These people either stay in Syria or go elsewhere through Syria.

” He also revealed to the outside world that the US British coalition forces had closed a pipeline in Iraq that “illegally transported oil to Syria”.

At the same time, rice, assistant to the president for national security affairs, said that President Bush did not rule out the possibility of military action in dealing with the Syrian issue.

So what kind of country is Syria? Syria covers an area of 185000 square kilometers and has a population of nearly 20 million.

Its per capita GDP ranks low among Middle East countries, but it is one of the military powers in the Middle East.

However, Israel’s “jafi strategic research center” believes that the Syrian army lacks practical training.

If the United States and Syria use force, Syria will never take advantage.

Syria has close relations with Lebanon, especially Hezbollah, which is listed as a terrorist organization by the United States and Israel.

After the Iraq war, the United States continued to accuse Syria of trying to possess weapons of mass destruction and supporting terrorism.

While Syria expressed its willingness to cooperate with the United States on the Iraq issue, it also said it would not compromise with the United States.

As the contradiction between Syria and Israel has always been difficult to solve, it is also difficult for the United States and Syria to make fundamental improvement.

Although the United States and Israel continue to accuse Syria and even threaten war, it is difficult for the United States to take Syria as a new target in a short period of time.

After the “9 / 11” incident, Syria provided certain cooperation to the United States on the issue of counter-terrorism and showed great restraint on the issue of Iraq.

Syria is an important country in the Middle East and maintains good relations with all countries in the Middle East except Israel.

France, Germany, Britain and other EU countries and Russia also maintain good relations with Syria.

If the United States launches a war against Syria, it is bound to worsen its relations with these important countries.

While the United States is still mired in Iraq, he will not take such a big risk.

Libya: the accusations of the United States against Libya mainly focus on the manufacturing of Pan Am airliner, the development of weapons of mass destruction and support for terrorism.

In 1988, a Pan Am passenger plane exploded over the Scottish town of Lockerbie, killing 270 people.

The following year, an Air France united passenger plane crashed in Niger, killing 170 people.

The United States, Britain and France accused Libya of causing the two air crashes and pushed the Security Council to adopt a series of resolutions imposing sanctions on Libya in 1992 and 1993.

In August 2003, Libya and the United States and Britain reached an agreement.

Libya acknowledged its responsibility in the Pan am air crash, condemned terrorism, and agreed to pay compensation of US $2.

7 billion to the relatives of the victims of the Lockerbie air crash in batches after the sanctions were lifted.

Libya’s nuclear program began in the 1970s.

After the outbreak of the Iraq war, Libya held many secret negotiations with Britain and the United States, and officially announced in December 2003 that it would voluntarily give up the program of developing weapons of mass destruction and accept the verification of the international community.

On December 28, ElBaradei led an IAEA expert group to inspect four nuclear facilities in Tripoli, the capital of Liberia.

In January 2004, Libya officially ratified the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty and formally applied for accession to the chemical weapons convention.

On March 10, Libya officially signed the additional protocol to the Treaty on the non proliferation of nuclear weapons with the International Atomic Energy Agency in Vienna, allowing the agency’s inspectors to conduct surprise inspections of all nuclear facilities in its territory.

On May 15, 2006, US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice issued a statement announcing that the United States decided to fully restore diplomatic relations with Libya, reopen its embassy in Tripoli and delete Libya from the list of “countries supporting terrorism”.

Therefore, the United States has no possibility of military attack on Libya.

Sudan: the United States accuses Sudan mainly of supporting terrorism, dictatorship and suppressing the people by force.

In February 2003, a large-scale bloody conflict broke out between tribal armed forces, militia organizations and Sudanese government forces in Darfur.

In August of the same year, the African Union sent peacekeeping forces to supervise the ceasefire in Darfur.

At present, the United Nations has been involved in the domestic situation in Sudan, and the Sudanese parties have reached a ceasefire agreement.

The United States has no direct evidence to accuse Sudan of supporting terrorism, but is worried that Sudan will become the next base of Al Qaeda.

The United States has been snooping on Sudan’s oil and other energy for a long time, which may be the reason why it is difficult to put pressure on the Sudanese government.

In the near future, the United States has the Iraq issue, the North Korean nuclear issue and the Iranian nuclear issue to deal with, and is unlikely to use force against Sudan.

Iraq: Saddam’s regime has been overthrown and a new Iraqi government has been established, but the situation in Iraq is still very unstable, bomb attacks occur almost every day, which gives the US military a headache.

The United States also wants to extricate itself from the quagmire of Iraq and train the Iraqi army so that it can take charge of Iraq’s security affairs.

However, the chaotic situation in Iraq is still difficult to be fundamentally improved for the time being.

Attacks against the troops stationed in the United States, Britain and other countries and Iraqi government forces will not stop.

The U.S. military is still in combat in Iraq, and large-scale battles such as the Iraq war will not be repeated, But small-scale fighting will often occur.