John McCain is not an incompetent on foreign policy because he served in the military. But he is not competent because he did serve in the military.

Not having military experience can be a plus as well as a minus.  There's no dishonor in not serving in the military, and with McCain's extensive military experience - he was totally wrong about Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, and the proper strategy to counter terrorism.  

The more McCain squawks about Obama, the more it shows his own insecurity and desperation.

May 22, 2003, John McCain:

"We won a massive victory in a few weeks, and we did so with very limited loss of American and allied lives. We were able to end aggression with minimum overall loss of life, and we were even able to greatly reduce the civilian casualties of Afghani and Iraqi citizens."

"We cannot continue to rely on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we've set. We've got to have a civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded."

I do take exception to Sen. McCain's stance on this.  The lack of military experience doesn't seem to affect Obama's ability to make tough, well thought out decisions.  He has consistently supported the troops that are in harms way, while making it clear that he does not support the reason's we are in Iraq.

The thought that McCain was an Officer in the US. Navy does not affect me in the way he hopes it will affect all ex-service and active service members. The Idea that he would keep our troops, some of which I have commanded and served with, in harms way to advance the Republican agenda is sickening.  It is apparent, and has been stated that OIL is the reason we have gone into Iraq.  Is this worth the price of a soldier's life?  I say no, it is not.

None of this matters for now.  Events that are in the future will determine the election, so far as I see.  What they are remains unknown.

Al Gore, concerning his own view of politics, recently  said:

"What politics has become requires a level of tolerance for triviality and artifice and nonsense that I have found in short supply."

However, having had that experience gives him the moral authority to do politically controversial things. In other words, the military establishment respects him. This means he will be able to bend the Pentagon to his will more easily than Obama, who lacks said experience and likely will enjoy about as much respect as Bill Clinton did.

This was one of Bill Clinton's greatest failings as president: due to his Vietnam War-era shenanigans and general absence of military service, he was not able to get the DOD (or the intel community, for that matter) to transition out of the Cold War-era posture. So instead of burning up precious political capital on these battles, he basically left the Pentagon alone and, in effect, adrift.

McCain's military experience and Obama's lack of military experience are both worthy of consideration when one looks at who would be a better President.  And it would be silly to think that the military experience will not weigh heavily in McCain's favor.  But Obama needs to keep pointing out that with all of McCain's experience he still made wrong choices in his  20 years in Congress. McCain's weakness is his record of support for arguably the worst President ever.  

"We have a lot of work to do. It's a very hard struggle, particularly given the situation on the Iraq-Pakistan border."