Backed by both Democratic and Republican leaders of the House of Representatives, a resolution allowing Bush to act unilaterally should the U.N. fails to disarm Iraq of alleged weapons of mass destruction could be passed as soon as Thursday October 10.

As debate opened in the House, Bush said that if forced into war, "We will prevail," adding, "I want to thank members of both political parties for realizing the seriousness of this issue."

"At this moment, the people's house begins debate on one of the most difficult questions we will ever face," said California Republican Rep. David Dreier.

"So far, the United Nations has proved unwilling to back its words with actions," said Dreier.

"As Saddam's primary enemy, it falls to the president and this Congress to protect the American people from this mass murderer," he said.

In the Senate, however, the chamber's senior Democrat, West Virginia Sen. Robert Byrd, attacked the proposed resolution, suggesting Congress would be abdicating its responsibilities if it were to pass it, reports CNN.

"He shall use all the military forces of this country in whatever ways he determines, wherever he determines, whenever he determines and for as long as he determines - that's the way it's written, lock, stock and barrel," said Byrd.

"Congress might as well just close the doors, put a sign over the doors and say, 'Going fishing'," he said.

But another Democrat, Sen. Joseph Lieberman, endorsed the administration's approach toward Iraq. "[If] we do not stop Saddam now, we will look back on some terrible day with a profound sense of remorse and guilt and say, 'Why didn't we do it?'"

The U.S. President, in a nationally televised address on Monday October 7, called Saddam "a homicidal dictator who is addicted to weapons of mass destruction."

The resolution is expected to pass both houses of Congress by the end of the week, but some skeptics remain.

Texas Democrat Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee called the resolution "premature" and suggested Bush seek a formal declaration of war against Iraq.

"Nothing in the present resolution on the floor prevents a unilateral, pre-emptive strike, which is a violation of international law," she said.

Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Carl Levin, a Democrat from Michigan, said Bush is giving "two totally inconsistent messages at the same time."

"When you read his words, he said 'I want authorization for force in support of U.N. resolutions. That is fine," said Levin. "What he wants in addition to that is not so fine, which is the authority to go it unilaterally, on our own."

Levin is offering an alternative resolution that would require Bush to have U.N. Security Council backing before any military action. A similar measure was introduced in the House, reports CNN.

Moving without U.N. support, he said, would weaken the year-old war on terrorism and increase the risk of American casualties.

Other critics have questioned Bush's assertion that al-Qaeda leaders fled from Afghanistan to Iraq.

California Democrat Rep. Mike Thompson, one of three congressmen who visited Iraq last week, told CNN, "We haven't seen any proof that any of this has happened…If there is substantiation, we need to see that in Congress, not hear it over the television monitor."

Though Saddam is "a bad guy," Thompson said, "I just do not believe, unless there is an immediate threat to Americans, that we need to do a pre-emptive first strike."

On Monday October 7, the U.S. President also said Iraq's threat was unique because it combined lasting ties to terrorists with a deadly arms program.

To bolster his claims, the White House has released two satellite photos depicting three factories in Iraq believed to be part of the weapons program.

But Bush, facing domestic uneasiness about war, a wave of recent protests and strong U.N. pressure, dropped his go-it-alone approach and said Washington would work with a coalition of allies.

"The time for denying, deceiving and delaying has come to an end. Saddam Hussein must disarm himself - or, for the sake of peace, we will lead a coalition to disarm him," he said.

Bush reiterated the call for an approach with a coalition of allies in Knoxville, Tennessee Tuesday October 8, urging Congress to show the United Nations that Americans "can speak with one voice" on the issue.

"If they [the United Nations] won't deal with this man, the United States of America will lead a coalition to disarm him for the sake of peace," Bush told a Republican campaign event in Tennessee.

Monday night, Bush also conceded that war with Iraq was neither imminent nor unavoidable and laid out what Baghdad must do: declare and destroy all of its weapons of mass destruction, end support for terrorism, cease persecuting civilians and stop all efforts to skirt U.N. sanctions.

"This isn't an issue of committing our military one way or the other," he repeated in Tennessee Tuesday October 8. "This doesn't say this resolution threat is imminent, nor does it say it's unavoidable. But it does send a clear signal to the world - and I mean not only the United Nations but the whole world - that we take this threat very seriously in America.

"Military option is my last choice, the last choice. But should we commit our military, we'll be ready. We'll be prepared. We'll have a great plan and make no mistake about it, we will prevail."