While generals and military strategists insist that now is not the time to re-ignite a war with Iraq, the Bush administration appears ready and determined to de-throne Iraqi President Saddam Hussein. Sanctions haven't worked, the President argues, and we "can no longer solely rely on a reactive posture as we have in the past."

Others disagree. As the House and Senate prepare to vote on whether to give the President sweeping powers to start a war, analysts warn that a preemptive military strike against Iraq would endanger the fragile stability of the region, alienate our allies, swell the ranks of al Qaeda, and shatter the principles at the core of American leadership.

What's behind the administration's fevered fervor on Iraq?

• 49 administration appointees are former execs, consultants or stockholders in top defense firms.
  
  
• Iraq's oil reserves are estimated to reach as high as 220 billion barrels - second only to Saudi Arabia. Russia, France and China already have post-sanctions contracts lined up with Saddam Hussein.
  
  
• Talk of the sour economy, sagging stock market and corporate accounting high jinks has taken a back seat to "war talk," says Senator Robert Byrd, D-WV, prompting many to wonder if the intense concentration on Iraq is an attempt to distract Americans from domestic dilemmas.
  
  
• A select group of well-connected and influential "hawks" has been sitting on a years-old plan to attack Iraq - opening the door, claim critics, to a new era of U.S.-defined world order.
  
  
• Of 32 signatories to the new National Security Strategy blueprint, only 3 ever donned a uniform.
  
  
• Unilateral U.S. action against Iraq could precipitate a dangerous drop in any remaining U.S. credibility among one billion Muslims and 300 million Arabs worldwide, experts warn.