We're due to hear many an argument before November as to whether persevering with the war in Iraq will make the United States safer or raise the danger level even higher. White House hopefuls can probably forget about giving the big speech next Jan. 20 unless they can make a convincing case that they understand the real threats to the nation's security and have good plans to counter them.

Whether it's Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama driving the Democratic bus, President Bush will take a pounding for what his critics see as reckless, damaging miscalculations over the course of the war, starting with the decision to invade Iraq in the first place.

John McCain stipulates that the effort was plagued by bad judgment but seems to fall back on the old poker player's logic: in for a dime, in for a dollar. He thinks our security hinges on fashioning some kind of successful outcome and is willing to pay the price to keep trying.

It might be small consolation for George Bush, but even if the war's-a-fiasco candidate wins next fall, the outgoing president will be able to point to another initiative of his that in its own way is sure to make the country stronger if there's the right kind of follow-through.

Consider another set of miscalculations -- the ones made by millions of students betrayed by their schools with lousy instruction in math.

Two years ago, Bush appointed a National Mathematics Advisory Panel and sicced it on a problem that long has gnawed at our nation's ability to keep pace with its global competitors. It's no secret that American young people tend to lag their peers in most industrialized countries when it comes to math proficiency.

When the panel recently issued its final report, it got right to the point. It concluded that "the delivery system in mathematics education -- the system that translates mathematical knowledge into value and ability for the next generation -- is broken and must be fixed." The causes of this breakdown are many, but a common denominator, as it were, has to do with failures to lay down a good foundation of skills and comprehension in the early grades.

That, of course, makes perfect sense, given the way math builds on itself as it becomes more complex. Without a good grasp of arithmetic, introductory algebra becomes a struggle. And since upper-level high school courses build on algebraic concepts and techniques, it's easy to be caught up the creek without a paddle.

Fractions are the downfall of many young students, according to the panel. If you're having trouble with fractions, solving equations once you move into algebra is likely to give you fits.

Curriculum and textbook issues come into play, the panel found, as it compared American instructional methods to those in other countries whose math students outshine ours.

Successful courses maintain a focus on key topics, as opposed to trying to cover everything, and they avoid repetition. Textbooks are more concise than is the American norm. Our textbooks, larded with photos and other excess baggage, can run many hundreds of pages, and their sheer bulk can be a disincentive to lug them home for study.

Of course, just about any textbook seems as if it would be better than none at all. A colleague here at the office reports that a child in one of Wake County's high schools has been expected this year to master the whys and wherefores of second-year honors algebra without a textbook of any sort. Go figure.

Certainly, a teacher should be explaining important concepts in class, and problems can be (and are in this case) distributed on worksheets. But what about providing a clearly written text that 1) covers the concepts, 2) gives sample problems and shows how to solve them, and 3) offers plenty of practice problems, with a key to check your answers? Is that too much to ask in a county that features itself as a leader in public education?

Math is vital to students who want to thrive in the higher academic altitudes. It is the lifeblood of knowledge in the sciences and technical fields. It teaches habits of mental discipline that can be valuable to the social worker as well as the physicist.

The national panel spoke of the nation's vulnerability if it continues to let its reservoir of mathematical talent erode. Our scientific, engineering and technological workforce, already sustained by many people from abroad, will become less and less competitive. Asian countries in particular, where math proficiency is widespread, will set the new standard -- to our detriment.

That's the global view. Zoom in to the student who's wrestling with that night's set of homework problems -- perhaps without a textbook -- and what's at stakes are more academic options (colleges expect math skills), more career options and a better chance at life fulfillment.

Here's an encouraging note: The panel assures us that, to succeed in math, you don't have to be a natural-born whiz. Effort can make the difference. But it's the duty of our educators to figure out how to teach math more effectively and of parents to keep their kids' heads in the game. If it takes a presidential panel to make it all add up, then this is a case where George Bush got the right answer.