The Bush administration is mulling its next move in the showdown with Saddam Hussein, including a possible attempt to push a new United Nations resolution authorizing force against Iraq.

National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice said Sunday it was becoming more obvious that the Iraqi president would not disarm voluntarily, and that the U.N. Security Council was letting him get away with it.

"The Security Council has to be an instrument of peace, but it has to be an instrument of peace that has teeth, or it is never going to be able to deal with the myriad difficult actors out there in international politics who intend to disturb that peace," Rice said.

The White House had a long holiday weekend to weigh options after being rebuffed Friday as most members of the Security Council lined up behind France's call for more weapons inspections and against military action.

Second U.N. resolution: necessary, or needless?

A sample of your responses:

I think out of respect for Tony Blair and his steadfast support of the United States we should try for a second resolution.However we should not depend on it,and we should try to get it right away...It shocks me to see there are so many uninformed people in this country protesting what OUR government is trying to acomplish.All they have to do is look at the history of Iraq's leaders and it shouldnt be all that difficult to figure out what they will do again and again if they are not stopped.
Mark
IN

A second Security Council resolution is needless, because the Security Council (in its present form) is useless.
Mark Z.
Hicksville, NY

No! You do not need a resolution to decided if resolution has been met.  You need a decision!!!!!!!
James M.
USN/HMC/RET

Needless! Indeed, every time in recent history we have worried what the UN wanted or the world thought, it's been WRONG!
Mike M.
Lafayette, IN

A 2nd resolution is not necessary, however it will broaden worldwide public support & make it easier for our allies to support us.
Rich
NY

If we insist on trying a second resolution, it must, as 1441 did, include human rights for Kurds, Shiites, Turkomens and for all Iraqis as well as disarmament. Saddam, along with Kim, is the world's most brutal dictator in power today.
Wart, Wren and Bob K.
South Orange, NJ

- Send your comments to: friends@foxnews.com

FOX and Friends' Question of the Day is brought to you by .

- Note: The views and opinions expressed on this page do not necessarily reflect those of FOX News or its subsidiaries