Why will it be any different than Bill Clinton's response to terrorist attacks on American soil? Let's take the BEST documented example:
In 1995, eight Iraqi soldiers defectors to the US (compliments of Bush I) from Gulf War I set up Timothy McVeigh (or assisted him, depends on how you want to look at it) in blowing up the Federal Building in Oklahoma City. Seismic evidence reveals multiple explosions which is consistent with what witnesses said happened.
Clinton in response set up McVeigh and Nichols as the lone nuts who did this, even though Jayna Davis has a box or two of sworn depositions that say it didn't happen that way. (Clinton was assisted by Jamie Gorelick, you remember her and the "wall", don't you? She was in the news recently in the financial crises when she got one of the $600k bonuses on a $550k salary or thereabouts, the lesson is when you don't put the cockroaches in jail when they first screw up BIGTIME, they'll be back to make a bigger mess later).
The NY TIMES led the way to convince everyone that McVeigh was the lone nut, but there were MANY problems. The truck bomb unfortunately for the Gov't just didn't have a big enough crater under it (which is a crude measure of explosive power).
The short story is that Jayna Davis has a well researched book that says it did NOT happen as the Gov't says, but instead this was a state sponsored terrorist attack but what's important the Sheeple and the FREEPERS and everyone else continue on believing a lie.
The difference is, Obama won't have to lie, he'll be able to say the terrorist died in the attack, case closed, no matter if Iran just killed 100 people in the subway of NYC. He'll have what's his name to the White House for tea and discussion.
Link, please