My guess is that we still need a couple of months to let the diplomats have one more try and get the rest of our forces in place. That puts the start date at late fall/early winter, which is an optimum time to initiate a war in that part of the world.
What the networks DON'T want to do is get caught with their pants down, i.e. the war starts and they don't have enough resources in place to cover it. I see their current posturing as a hedge against future events and perhaps even a dry run for upcoming coverage. Don't forget: some CBS affiliates actually aired (by mistake) a rehearsal broadcast before a U.S. military operation in the 1990s (I think it was Kosovo).
One of the best indicators of network preparations is where the anchors and key correspondents are assigned. When Jennings, Rather and Brokaw go to the Middle East, that will be a definite sign that military action is in the offing. Most of the reporters in the region right now are journeymen, like CBS' Mark Phillips. When the primary anchors or hier apparents like Brian Williams start arriving in theater, I'll be more convinced that the war is about to start.
One final thought: despite being a former journalist, nothing would please me more than to see the big media outlets get caught unprepared for the war. Leaks of classified information have gotten totally out of hand, so it would be nice to see the Administration and the Pentagon put one over on the press corps....
I agree in theory, but I doubt seriously that Jennings, Rather, Brokaw & Williams'll go. They're much more visible anchoring from NYC. But like I said, when Amanpour, Banfield & (yes) Geraldo get there (and are all there at the same time), then we're pretty close.
They aren't going to worry about bringing Saddam out they'll seal him in.....they're not worried about street fighting because it will be the republican guard doing it.....IMHO