http://uk.reuters.com/article/UKNews...27749220080624

will there be a "terrorist attack" on US soil at a convenient time before the election?

how are the politics of terrorism going to affect the world stage, and the lives of average citizens in the USA, in the next five years or so?

I wouldn't put it past them. Bet you gas prices drop dramatically a week before the election too, and go right back up afterwards.

__________________
Don't blame me, I voted for Ron Paul.

I guess they just revealed their campaign strategy huh. They're going to run on the same old tired 'fear' card.
Whether there are enough morons left who still buy that, well.

I would have sent this to Conspiracy, given the implications of the title with reference to the article, but the OP seems to have taken the step of adding in a valid political question here, so I'll let it stay. To begin with, I don't think a terror attack would be particularly advantageous to either side. McCain supporters could go with the "see, this is why we need a strong national defence!" strategy, but the Obama camp could also make an effective argument saying essentially "this is proof the Bush policy [subtext: that McCain represents] has failed to protect us, we need a new strategy of diplomacy and engagement!"

__________________
-=שמע ישראל יהוה אלהינו יהוה אחד=-

A major terrorist attack on US soil would help McCain. People would want to feel safe and have a leader to look up to, and Obama wouldn't be it. Any attempt by Obama to paint this as George Bush's fault would be seen a disgusting ploy and would backfire.

This will not happen though. You have to ask who is going to do this. If it is the military-industrial complex, it would probably be to their benefit to wait until the next President takes office and force him to keep up with spending/war. If it happens before and Obama wins he can ignore it more easily.

But if anyone does it, it will be Islamic radicals.

If Islamic radicals staged an attack before the election it would mean they want McCain to win. They would know that their actions would cow the already docile American public into voting for an Imperialist ex-soldier who's Middle East strategies will be conductive to their continuation and expansion of what they see as the coming global jihad. Obama's reasonable approach to U.S. foreign policy would shore up support in areas like the middle east and that would be counter intuitive to the goals of the terrorists. Ironically by electing leaders that are national security driven and whose foreign policies reflect those of the Bush years you guys are actually doing the terrorists a favor...

If only we gave up, and tried to get along, there wouldn't be terrorism any more.

This is definitely true. It's just like the 9/11 = a direct result of American foreign policy argument; it seems like a valid argument but to openly discuss it would be political suicide.

That's one thing that impressed me about Ron Paul during the Republican debates, he wanted to discuss the causes of 9/11, and although he was goaded into saying it, he refrained from expressly stating "9/11 = self inflicted".

Terrorists want confrontation, another neo-con in the White House would be exactly what they need.

Yep. If we didn't confront them they would just stop!