By Steve Kingstone BBC correspondent in Washington

If this is really is a game, the stakes have risen dramatically.

Mr Bush is still bullish

The president is now demanding that all countries "put their cards on the table", in an all-or-nothing vote on a second resolution.

In his televised press conference on Thursday evening, Mr Bush said the issue would be resolved "within days".

As things stand the US can count on the support of Britain, Spain and Bulgaria. But a total of nine security council members must give their approval if the resolution is to pass.

Even then, the move could be blocked if France, Russia or China were to use their security council vetoes.

The president stressed that, if the resolution fails, he is still prepared to wage war on Saddam Hussein.

'Desirable' resolution

"If we need to act," he said, "we will act, and we really don't need the United Nations' approval to do so."

But clearly, a second resolution remains desirable for the US and almost essential for Britain, where Tony Blair is engaged in an uphill struggle to win round public opinion. The same is true for another key ally, Spanish Prime Minister Jose-Maria Aznar.

President Bush is once again letting the course of this process be driven by the remarks of two weapons inspectors

Behind the scenes, British diplomats are leading discussions about changing the wording of the resolution. They are suggesting that a "yes" vote would not automatically trigger war, and that Saddam Hussein might be given a final, brief opportunity to disarm.

Would such a compromise succeed? The signs from Russia and France are not encouraging.

A positive report from the chief weapons inspectors on Friday would make it far more difficult, if not impossible, for the resolution to succeed.

To that end, the president sought to focus the minds of chief inspectors Hans Blix and Mohamed El Baradei, as they prepare to address the security council.

Tough talk

He said they needed to answer a single question: "Has the Iraqi regime fully and unconditionally disarmed, as required by Resolution 1441?"

The inspectors may choose to define their obligations differently. And in the past Mr Blix has shown himself to be a man who does not take kindly to being told what to say.

The reality is that, for all the tough talk, President Bush is once again letting the course of this process be driven by the remarks of two weapons inspectors who he thinks are doomed to failure.

Mr Bush talked of a post-Saddam Iraq

So what lies ahead for Mr Bush and the coalition?

In the best case scenario, Saddam Hussein goes into exile. American troops move in to oversee the disarmament process. "That's fine by me," said Mr Bush.

A workable scenario would be another mixed report from the inspectors.

Britain helps broker a compromise, through which a second resolution is eventually passed. War follows. Countries make their own decisions on whether or not to join the coalition.

The nightmare scenario would be if Dr Blix and Dr ElBaradei say Iraqi co-operation is improving.

They ask for more time. The second resolution is resoundingly defeated. Without a clear moral mandate, will Britain really support America in the march to war? Could Mr Bush go it alone? His bluff is called.