Washington ? President Bush on Wednesday said the enemy in Iraq is “far from being defeated,” but he vowed not to be rushed into adjusting his strategy and gave little indication that he intends to veer sharply from the direction his war policies have taken.

“We’re not going to give up. The stakes are too high and the consequences too grave,” Bush said after meeting at the Pentagon with the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld and Rumsfeld’s designated successor, Robert Gates.

There are competing schools of thought inside the military and the administration on whether a short-term increase in U.S. troop strength in Iraq – possibly in the range of 20,000 – would be enough to quell the sectarian warfare in Baghdad.

After a third straight day of soliciting war advice from top military and diplomatic officials, Bush gave no clue as to whether he will include that in his forthcoming plan. Some generals believe it would be too little, too late, in a war that already has claimed more than 2,900 U.S. lives.

Bush said he was considering a wide range of options he has heard during a week of consultations, while rejecting ideas “that would lead to defeat.” He said the rejected ideas included “leaving before the job is done, ideas such as not helping this (Iraqi) government” to function and gain Iraqis’ confidence.

“But one thing people have got to understand is we’ll be headed toward achieving our objectives,” he said. “And I repeat: If we lose our nerve, if we’re not steadfast in our determination to help the Iraqi government succeed, we will be handing Iraq over to an enemy that would do us harm.”

Bush’s very public effort to recalibrate the war effort comes with growing public pressure generated by the November elections that put Democrats in control of Congress and led to Rumsfeld’s ouster.

The president said he would present soon a “new way forward” in Iraq, while continuing to support the government of Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, whose ability to forge a viable governing coalition is questioned privately by some administration officials. He cited “horrific” violence in Iraq carried out by a ruthless enemy bent on toppling “this young democracy.”

None of his comments sounded like a prelude to withdrawing a substantial number of U.S. troops over the coming year, as was recommended by the Iraqi Study Group, a bipartisan commission that studied war options since March.

A number of administration officials have suggested privately that while Bush has considered the possibility of a short-term troop increase, there is no consensus from the military on the wisdom of surging a large number of additional troops. In fact, there is little sign that senior military leaders have shifted from their view that adding troops would undercut the incentive for Iraqis to take more responsibility for their own security.

Just last month, the top U.S. commander for U.S. forces in the Middle East, Gen. John Abizaid, told Congress that while a troop increase of 20,000 could have a short-term positive effect, it could not be sustained because the Army and the Marine Corps simply are stretched too thin to maintain a bigger force there.

A parallel possibility under discussion is increasing the number of U.S. troops who are placed inside Iraqi army and police units as advisers, providing a kind of on-the-job training that the senior military spokesman in Baghdad, Maj. Gen. William Caldwell, told reporters Wednesday is already paying notable dividends.

The military also has pressed the case that any adjustments in troop levels would be fruitless without accompanying improvements on the political and economic fronts, to reconcile the rival sectarian factions and to put young people to work.