Two war I had followed more closely till now have been NATO invasion on Afghanistan & Iraq. Both have similarities as well. People had no voting rights and say in governance in both the countries. And so would have been happy to see the regime fallen with them having to just stay in home and do nothing. Yes, democracy was given their hands. Whoever fighting against the governments were either killed or exiled. That makes a great reason for other countries to invade in the name of liberation. Afghanistan simply bought the war. Case was different for Iraq, it was WMD which where never found or British failed to place it.
So the question I've been asking myself, is it fair for a nation to get involved in internal of different nation?
Looking at how governments can suppress it own people and how army/police forces are controlled it might be impossible without support from another nation. Take Myanmar, until army is pushed out democracy will never return.
Looking at what happened in Egypt, suppressive regimes can be changed in fortnight with peaceful demonstration without much outside help. No blood shed but changing president alone solve anything? It may time will tell. Positive of it people have less to re-construct.
Throwing away government and re-building nation is easily said than done. Well, that depends on how big the nation is but certainly not the same how kings where thrown few centuries ago. Building nation on foreign aid cannot be a long term solution. Though not similar, how Iceland boldly faced financial crunch and recovered cannot be ignored. Being dependent on aid will never help unless the intentions are good if not another Iraq or Egypt is totally possible.
So yes, getting foreign help is fine but letting them dictate terms NO NO.
How these countries re-build and grow can only inspire people of similar nations and set example.