Would an attack on Iran before the presidential election benefit Barack Obama or John McCain? It's a question we did not ask ourselves over the weekend, but might have had we read about President Bush's furtive thumbs-up to Israeli officials who may be planning an assault on Iran's nuclear facilities.

It's quite possible that this report, the latest in a string of signs suggesting that serious attack preparations are underway, is no more than a desperate, Hail Mary ploy aimed at coercing Iran into abandoning their uranium enrichment program. Or, it could mean that we're on the precipice of a devastating, world-altering conflict. So either way, it's a win. But of those charming bastards running for president, who stands to gain the most if the metal really starts flying in Iran? Sadly, it's not Mike Gravel. We'll take a few guesses after the jump, based on some of the responses Iran is expected to consider in the aftermath of a military strike.

• Attacks on Israel A scenario that Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Rev. John Hagee have been dreaming about for years.
Advantage: McCain. Obama only earned his li'l deputy badge from America's highly-influential Israel lobby a month ago. Too soon to fully trust him when the ayatollahs are on the warpath.

• Attacks on US forces nearby. Iraq and Afghanistan are basically Iran's Canada and Mexico. Increasing the number of pickup trucks filled with money, men and weapons the Iranians send to their neighbors could exacerbate a worsening situation in Afghanistan and derail claims of the troop surge's success in Iraq.
Advantage: Obama. American voters were tired of these wars in 2006. This alone could make an attack on Iran a net plus for Obama.

• Hostage-Takings and U.S. Installation Bombings Abroad.. This would probably bring back a lot of good memories for those middle-aged Iranian operatives who really excelled at this sort of thing during the 80s and '90s.
Advantage: McCain. Chuck Norris, Sylvester Stallone and Arnold Schwarzenegger are all supporting McCain.

• Strait of Hormuz Showdown. Iranian mines, missiles, speedboat raids and land defenses could put the squeeze on a waterway through which up to 40 percent of the world's oil supply travels. The U.S. military is (coincidentally???) scheduled to have a curiously high amount of its naval assets ready and available for overseas action in August and September and would be able to establish some control of the strait eventually, but maybe only after lots of people and things get blowed up.
Advantage: McCain. A tough call given McCain's obvious weakness on the economy, but $15 a gallon gas could be enough to kill the "No Blood for Oil" slogan once and for all.

• Attacks within the US. Though it could quickly lead to the complete annihilation of the current Iranian regime, blowing up a passenger airline or an Amtrak Metroliner is probably well within their capabilities at the moment.
Advantage: McCain. McCain advisor Charlie Black has already acknowledged that an attack on U.S. soil would be a "a big advantage" for McCain. And indeed, Toby Keith war anthems and Barack Obama do not mix.