US Secretary of State Mr Colin Powell told the Security Council only the credible threat of force would ensure Iraqi compliance with the disarmament demands of the United Nations.
"Nobody wants war but it is clear that the limited progress we have seen. . .comes from the presence of a large military force," he said in response to UN inspectors who said they were making progress towards destroying Iraqi weapons.
"It comes from the unified political will of this council and the willingness to use force if it comes to that to make sure that we achieve the disarmament of Iraq.
"Now is the time for the council to tell Saddam that the clock has not been stopped by his stratagems and his machinations," he added.
Mr Powell said the reports by chief UN inspectors Dr Hans Blix and Dr Mohamed ElBaradei showed "a catalogue of non-co-operation" by the Iraqis. The inspectors saw progress in some areas and delay and reluctance in some others.
"The time is to send a clear message to Saddam that we have not been taken in by this transparent package," he added.
Pressing his case for a resolution finding Iraq had violated UN disarmament requirements, Mr Powell said Iraq had been shopping in an unnamed European country for aluminium tubes. The United States has alleged that the high-strength aluminium tubes were to enrich uranium for use in a nuclear bomb.
Dr ElBaradei has disputed the US interpretation of the tubes, saying they are probably for conventional rockets.
But Mr Powell hit back, saying the milling on the tubes was 50 times more precise than it needed to be if the Iraqis had planned to use them to retool rockets.
"Iraq's small steps are not initiatives. They have been pulled out or pressed out under the threat of force. . .Co-operation is often more apparent than real," he added.
Echoing the argument put by President Bush on Thursday, he said the only question the council should examine was whether Iraq was in full compliance in disarming.
But Iraq has not made the strategic decision to disarm, he said.
UK
The British Foreign Secretary, Mr Jack Straw, said in his address: "To find a peaceful solution to the current crisis, the council must not retreat from the demands it set out clearly in 1441.
"What we need is an irreversible and strategic decision by Iraq to disarm, to yield to the inspectors all of its weapons of mass destruction and all relevant information which it could and should have provided at any time in the last 12 years."
Addressing his French counterpart across the council chamber, Mr Straw took issue with Mr Dominique de Villepin's assertion that the British and American forces deployed to the Gulf were adding to the diplomatic pressure on Saddam.
Mr Straw told him: "With respect to you, my good friend, I think it is the other way around, I really do. . .The strong outside pressure is, and let's be blunt about this, the presence of over 200,000 US and UK young men and young women willing to put their lives on the line for the sake of this body, the United Nations." Mr Straw continued: "There is only one possible, sensible conclusion that we can draw. We have to increase the pressure on Saddam Hussein, we have to put this man to the test.
"The Iraqis have the answer book already. . .it may take time to fabricate further falsehoods, but the truth takes only seconds to tell."
Mr Straw told the Security Council he was tabling an amendment to the draft resolution proposed jointly with the United States and Spain which, if adopted, would give Iraq a "further period" to comply with the earlier resolution 1441.
The amendment proposed that unless the Security Council decided by March 17th that Iraq had taken its "final opportunity" to disarm, then serious consequences would follow.
The purpose was to gain support from undecided members of the 15-nation Security Council who have grave misgivings about voting for immediate warfare.
France
Mr Dominique de Villepin, French Foreign Minister, seized upon the report by the UN weapons inspectors to reinforce his call to give more time for the inspections of Iraqi weapons of mass destruction.
To bolster this demand, he renewed the threat, made earlier this week by France, Germany and Russia, to veto any new resolution brought before the Security Council authorising US-led military action against Iraq.
"France as a permanent Security Council member would not accept a resolution allowing the automatic use of force," he said.
Mr de Villepin added for good measure that should such a new resolution be introduced, the vote should be attended by heads of state or government.
This underlined France's determination both to wring maximum publicity from its anti-war stance and to remind the US and its allies of the importance of the UN as the symbol for preserving international peace in the new world order.
The French position yesterday was based both on a belief in the continued value of the UN inspections and on a confident assessment that a resolution now being circulated by Britain among Security Council members would not obtain the necessary nine votes in favour.
In a direct snub to the British initiative, he ruled out the idea of placing "an ultimatum" in the form of a short deadline for the Iraqi regime to comply fully with the inspections.
Yesterday, Mr de Villepin made two minor concessions, which were considered unlikely to alter the sharp divide within the Security Council. The first was a proposal to reduce his earlier idea for a maximum 120 days to complete the inspections to something shorter.
The second concession was to state publicly that the large US and British troop build-up round Iraq had helped to put pressure on Baghdad and accelerate the inspection process. But he insisted only one question needed to be answered at the present time "Should we go to war now to disarm Iraq?"
China
Chinese Foreign Minister Mr Tang Jiaxuan said China saw no reason to "close the door to peace" and did not favour a new Security Council resolution authorising the use of force against Iraq.
Mr Tang told the UN Security Council that UN weapons inspectors were carrying out their work "smoothly on the whole, with progress made and results achieved. It is highly necessary to continue the inspections. As long as we stick to the road of political settlement, the goal of destroying Iraq's WMD [weapons of mass destruction] could still be achieved," he said.
"Let them [the inspectors] continue inspections and find out the truth, until they complete the mandate of [U.N. resolution] 1441.
"At the same time, we also urge the Iraqi government to take further effective measures to strengthen its co-operation on substance with inspectors," Mr Tang told the members of the Security Council.
Russia
Russian Foreign Minister Mr Igor Ivanov said that how the Iraq crisis is settled could decide the world's future peace and security as he made a new plea against war.
"It is quite clear that the way in which we resolve this problem will determine not just the future of Iraq,"Mr Ivanov told the Security Council.
"In essence, we are now laying the foundations for ensuring peace and security in our time." Mr Ivanov strongly opposed any new UN resolution on Iraq as the United States, Britain and Spain have proposed. Russia has joined France and Germany in saying that it will not allow any resolution that authorises force against Iraq. "We do not need new Security Council resolutions. We have enough of those," said the Minister. "We now need active support for the inspectors in carrying out their tasks."
The United States so far only has four sure votes in its corner -- its own, with those of Britain, Spain and Bulgaria.
In speeches yesterday, it also failed to pick up support from any of the six uncommitted Security Council members. Two of them -- Chile and Pakistan -- seemed during the debate to be leaning towards the anti-war camp and last night Chile said it was opposed to the proposed new resolution.
Pakistan's UN ambassador, Mr Munir Akram, said: "The cost of delay in our view will be much less than the cost of war."
Chile's Foreign Minister, Mr Soledad Alvear, said: "The statements we have heard lead us to believe that a solution that reconciles a yearning for peace and disarmament is still possible."
German Foreign Minister Mr Joschka Fischer said he found it "incomprehensible" that the world community could abandon peaceful efforts to disarm Iraq and opt for a war that would bring death and destruction to thousands of "innocent people." "Peaceful disarmament is possible and there is a real alternative to war," he said, adding that the British proposal would quickly lead to war.
Of the other neutral nations, Mexico, Cameroon, Guinea and Angola remained on the fence. Mexican Foreign Minister Mr Luis Ernesto Derbez summed up their position by saying all parties should keep working for consensus.
Angola's Deputy Foreign Minister, Mr George Chicoti, told the council it supported strengthened weapons inspections in Iraq but also wanted to see Baghdad increase its co-operation with the UN. He added that his statement should not be "misinterpreted" as a sign that Angola was not willing to act against Iraq.
Cameroon said the UN Security Council should recognise that Iraq had not taken the chance to disarm but also urged a consensus to step up pressure on the Baghdad regime.
"At this stage, the council recognises that Iraq has not yet taken the final opportunity offered by the council," Cameroon's ambassador, Mr Martin Belinga-Eboutou, told Security Council members.
Chile appeared to lean against the US position. Foreign Minister Mr Soledad Alvear said: "The statements we have heard lead us to believe that a solution that reconciles a yearning for peace and disarmament is still possible."
Syrian Foreign Minister Mr Faruq al-Shara told the UN Security Council that Iraq had actively co-operated with UN inspectors, and said there was no need for a second UN resolution authorising the use of force against Baghdad.
"Iraq has co-operated actively," Mr Shara said. The Syrian Minister added that the destruction of missiles was "tangible and material evidence of this co-operation that can be considered neither deceptive nor insignificant."
Spain rejected calls for sending more inspectors and giving Iraq more time to disarm as "a strategy of impotence."
"Disarming Iraq is not a question of more inspectors or more time, this, to quote a French thinker, is merely a strategy of impotence," Spanish Foreign Minister Ms Ana Palacio said.
She said continued inspections only could be conducted "on the basis of a radical change in the Iraqi regime's willingness to disarm, and up to now the Iraqi regime has given no sign of being willing to disarm. The treat remains and Saddam has still not complied with the resolutions of this council," Ms Palacio said. "His strategy remains the same -- to fool us," she said.