One interesting thing about this is that consistently it appear the police is much more willing to attack civilians, even with deadly force, than the military. May just be a matter of the police having internalised its role of keeper of internal security while the army focuses on external security. The police are trained to think about citizens as potential criminals while the army only thinks about external threats and isn't trained to consider their countrymen as potential enemies.

So, in what may be my last act of "advising", I'll advise you to cut the jargon. -- My old PhD advisor, to me, 26/2/11

Unlike Gaddafi, Mubarak never seemed willing to go all-out and try to crush the population (not that the army would've gone along with that anyway).  That may just be my impression due to having not gotten the full story.

Fisk claims that Mubarak ordered it, but the troops on the gorund refused:

Robert Fisk: As Mubarak clings on... What now for Egypt? - Robert Fisk, Commentators - The Independent

But the critical moment came on the evening of 30 January when, it is now clear, Mubarak ordered the Egyptian Third Army to crush the demonstrators in Tahrir Square with their tanks after flying F-16 fighter bombers at low level over the protesters.

Many of the senior tank commanders could be seen tearing off their headsets - over which they had received the fatal orders - to use their mobile phones. They were, it now transpires, calling their own military families for advice. Fathers who had spent their lives serving the Egyptian army told their sons to disobey, that they must never kill their own people.

First, what would that be? The Tikriti clan, or even the entire Sunni population, compares to the population of Sirte and surrounding areas resp. Sirte and Tripoli. Second, why do you make a point based on addam loyalists? The civil war in Iraq wasn't at all propagated by Saddam loyalists only.

The tribal angle seems less worrisome here given the widespread protests before Gaddafi began his clampdown.

Again, the tribal angle can be judged once the fronts move into Ghaddafi-aligned tribal areas. Well, in fact, we don't even know what locals living between Benghazi and Sirte thought of the rebels from Benghazi.

That he also needs mercenaries doesn't bode well

Mercs are more useful than loyalists in terrorising locals. In a way, the Iraq terrorists using foreign suicide bombers knew that, too.

These revolutions seem to transcend religious and tribal loyalties.

Well, there were deadly Copt-Muslim clashes in Egypt, and, even if from the side of the repressors rather than the protesters, the Shi'a-Sunni angle of the Gulf States protests is rather obvious. Which doesn't mean that the equality and unity slogans cannot turn into lasting social reality, but it does mean that such a positive development is not a given.

_{*Lunatic*, n.
One whose delusions are out of fashion.}