Anyway, the fundamental problem with the argument that launched the thread is the implication that it is up to the West to decide which countries may or may not have elected governments. Not only is that ideologically dubious (and so obviously so that there's no need to elaborate. Besides, others have done so already), but it's also questionable from a practical point of view. Should Western soldiers invade Egypt and install a pliable puppet dictator to make sure that Western economic and strategic interests in the country are protected? Why, I'm sure that that would go down very well in a country with a colonial history within living memory and in which anti-imperalism (anti western imperialism, that is) forms - or at least used to - an important part of national identity?
No, but at the very least we should have been calling up every connection we had in the Egyptian Army saying - 'please, mow them down, please use the bunker busters, we won't have any criticism, in fact we'll send you 3 billion next year instead of 1.5', instead of that crapola about wanting 'democracy'.