President Bush on Wednesday warned Iraqi military leaders they would be prosecuted as war criminals if they used chemical or biological weapons on U.S. troops in the event of an attack on Iraq.

"There'll be serious consequences for any general or soldier who were to use weapons of mass destruction on our troops or innocent lives within Iraq," Bush said in a speech in St. Louis.

The comments, while a repeat of similar remarks Bush made in the fall, came at a critical time with the Pentagon building up forces in the Gulf and Bush vowing to lead a coalition of willing nations to attack Iraq if Saddam does not disarm.

"Should any Iraqi officer or soldier receive an order from Saddam Hussein or his sons or any of the killers who occupy the high levels of their government, my advice is don't follow that order," Bush said. "If you choose to do so, when Iraq is liberated, you will be treated, tried and persecuted as a war criminal."

Bush in recent days has expressed increasing frustration with some members of the U.N. Security Council such as France and Germany who are willing to let U.N. weapons inspections proceed for months and reluctant to use force to ensure Iraq's compliance with United Nations disarmament resolutions.

German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder made plain Wednesday that his country will refuse to back an Iraq war resolution in the U.N. Security Council, ending weeks of hedging and aligning himself more closely with his main European partner, France.

Also Wednesday, NATO postponed a decision on whether to prepare supporting measures in any U.S.-led war after a heated debate among ambassadors, diplomats said.

German and French leaders reinforced their stance in newspaper articles published Wednesday in Germany's Berliner Zeitung and France's Liberation.

"In the crises involving terrorism, Iraq and North Korea, our peoples can count on the governments of Germany and France to join forces to preserve peace, avoid war and ensure people's security," Schroeder wrote.

"Our aim is to put the power of Europe at the service of peace," said French President Jacques Chirac. "That underlines our actions in Afghanistan and in the Iraq crisis."

That followed similar statements by France, which said this week that it sees no justification for a war for now and left open the possibility of a French veto if the United States sought a new Security Council resolution authorizing military action.

Schroeder has already ruled out a German combat role in any Iraq war. He has maintained an uneasy balance for months between his country's alliance with the United States and strong anti-war sentiment in Germany, which helped him win re-election last year. His platform built on defiance of Washington has left U.S.-German ties strained.

Though it wields no veto, Germany is set to assume a central role in Iraq war diplomacy when it takes over the council chairmanship in February, just after U.N. inspectors are due to submit a progress report on Jan. 27.

Schroeder previously said that Germany would decide how it would vote in the Security Council only when a second Iraq resolution takes shape. But Defense Minister Peter Struck said already last week that a vote in favor was "basically not imaginable anymore."

Schroeder did not specify whether Germany would vote against a resolution or abstain, but he said Berlin's position was increasingly being "understood by the European partners and in the world."

While seeking partnership with France, Germany has gone even further than Paris in its anti-war stance. The French have left open the possibility of military action against Saddam Hussein as a last resort, but Schroeder has not.

Still, British Foreign Office minister Denis MacShane said Wednesday he was confident the United Nations would approve action against Iraq.

"The U.N. will accept its responsibilities in this matter and make sure that Saddam Hussein does not get away with what he has been getting away with for years," MacShane told British Broadcasting Corp. radio.

NATO's decision to postpone the question of whether to prepare supporting measures in any U.S.-led war came after a heated debated.

"It was a pretty tough discussion. The arguments were flying. It's all about timing," one diplomat at the alliance's Brussels headquarters said.

The United States last week formally asked the 19-nation alliance to consider six measures to provide indirect military assistance in case of a war with Iraq, mainly to protect NATO ally Turkey against possible Iraqi attacks.

Diplomats said the allies were not opposed to the U.S. requests in principle, but were anxious not to appear to be endorsing military action before diplomatic avenues had been exhausted.

"In principle all would be in favor of what's proposed, especially with regard to looking after Turkey. My guess is the picture will change after the 27th," he said, referring to next week's key report by weapons inspectors to the United Nations.

The United States has also suggested that NATO play a role in post-war humanitarian and stability operations in Iraq.