"2) Which neoconservative impulse will win out -- the embrace of democratic longing, or the fear of Islamic movements taking power?"

Let's unpack that a bit. Why would an Islamic movement taking power be a problem? And why would it necessarily preclude an embrace of democracy? Even if it did preclude democracy, why would that necessarily be bad?

In fact "Islamic" isn't the problem at all. Rather it's the violently jihadist nature of the Muslim Brotherhood, Hezbollah, Hamas, and the various Al Qaeda offshoots.

But it's interesting that these movements all tend to be described more often as "Islamic" rather than "violent" or even "jihadist", even by commentators who aren't at all neocon.

Since Professor's tolerance level to stupidity of his readers and commenters is high; let me make a run here....

1) How much logic will be contorted in an effort to argue that the 2003 invasion of Iraq was the trigger?
>Nah, not much. Surprise is Obama did not make the argument of 'tech. innovation as freedom maker' by pointing out how obviously Facebook and Twitters are the real reasons why all this is happening when you have young demographic profile. Common on Professor, when Obama says we are winding down in Iraq and then NeoCons give a sigh of relief; we should know hardly anything is there to exploit politically in Iraq invasion. That water has passed under the bridge long, long back.

2) Which neoconservative impulse will win out -- the embrace of democratic longing, or the fear of Islamic movements taking power?
>Fear of Islamic movements taking power; stupid why bother to ask this question.

3) A year from now, will Tunisia actually be a democracy? The "Jasmine Revolution" portion of this story is easy -- it's the grubby parts of institution-building and power-sharing that muck things up.
> Yes and No. Is Pakistan a democracy? That is like trying to answer when you stopped beating you spouse. So let us not go there. We all know what royal hash it is going to be a year later. Of course, that does not mean Tunisia change should not happen (and in Egypt and other places too). It is just that Prof. you are asking a 'trick question'. You know very well, Democracy is a multi-decade project (and in case of a country named USA even after centuries we still try to perfect it with so many glaring failures). So show some mercy on these faltering attempts of Democracy and baby steps at Political Freedom. How about you being an adult here and be patient? Because it is not you or your kid who is burning in the Arab street for that matter.

One year from now I seriously doubt anyone (even Mr. Lynch, Walt or Drezner) will be writing about this.

As for the second question, neoconservatives will probably hope that the more secular factions will gain power.

1.Not even close to as much ink is being spilled to spin these events as somehow vindication of Obama's foreign policy or that he's handling this just right (cf. Rothkopk, Lynch on this site). What these commentators blithely ignore is that the authoritarian regimes that are falling are generally US allies, while those unfriendly seem to be experiencing little problem holding onto power or are expanding (cf. Lebanon).

Could you script a more textbook example of an empire losing power and influence as this (client states flipping and driving up the cost of vital resource?)?

Why not publicly offer Mubarak $1 billion to "get on the plane"?

Is this a stupid idea, and if so, why?

I think that that $1B would buy more goodwill than the last $30B over 30 years. VP Suleiman would take over, at least until the September election, and we could continue to use the annual aid package as a lever to influence how democratic the election is.

In addressing topic 2) Which neoconservative impulse will win out -- the embrace of democratic longing, or the fear of Islamic movements taking power?

It can be seen in concerning Egypt that no state with significant ties such as the United States will risk at this moment completely backing Mubarak or the masses of protesting Egyptians. The Obama administration is holding to the policy of reiterating that "the outcome of these protests will be decided by the Egyptian people...". Despite many who may argue with my next point I believe that the "neoconservative impulse" of embracing democratic longing will prevail. If only because protests led by the youth in Tunisia, Egypt, and even Jordan manifest how US diplomatic relations with these respective presidential regimes and monarchy is not what the coming generation has in mind for their country. In regards to Egypt the argument of the Muslim Brotherhood taking power in a sweeping election and taking on an anti-US policy are blown out of proportion. The Muslim Brotherhood, while guilty of having inspired many more radical off shoots, and having a questionable history, is not the driving force in today's protests. The youth have inspired a revolution that will prevail despite the best efforts of Mubarak and his police apparatus to overcome the peoples anger. As for Mubarak being ousted by force or with the first legitimate vote, coming in a couple months, I will not guess at. In the end democracy will finally be real in Egypt and most likely a Islamic oriented party will take control it will be one in the middle as far as policies regarding relations with the west.