This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Military history: National This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status: Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion not met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion not met Associated task forces: /  National militaries task force

10 September 2006 Rednblu Asks:(Can you cite to a political analyst or historian saying this?) These are historical facts as both were the case as formed by the military members only in 1960 and 1980 with no civilians, lasting until return to civilian government and were never NSC. The history (the proper one) with citation has been posted to the NSC-Turkey several times but been reverted by BertilVidet every time. One more attempt was made today. -- 172.164.28.199 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.164.28.199 (talk) 05:47, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What is the importance of "do not have any relation to their democratic subsequent NSC bodies"? Do you mean the civilian governments did not have National Security Councils? Do you mean the NSC under civilian government had a different role? --Rednblu 07:00, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your constructive questions and assistance. This entry you are asking clarification is pertinent to the commentary by Bertilvidet under "the role of the military in Turkey" that he seems to percieve as the NSC function where it is not. For example after 1980 coup, the committee that run the country for couple of years called itself "Milli Guvenlik Konseyi" where the word "konsey" ironically meant council but had nothing to do with the "Milli Guvenlik Kurulu" which actually is tranlated as the Board of National Security verbatim but is the analogus body to the US NSC like National Security Council of Turkey that has been in existence in Turkey as a democratic and civilian - military mixed think-tank organization with advisory role since 1933 continuously. I tried to post the correct history of NSC at the pertinent article but it was obsessively deleted and reverted by bertilvidet, misleading the readers. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.128.84.84 (talk) 18:28, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I wouldn't worry about those other editors right now. They had a right to complain about no footnotes to a published scholar. And I will work with you to paraphrase the material you want to use from that government site. You did the right thing in asking for help where you did. Just some thoughts now because I am on the run--going jogging. Probably you already have enough detail on this National Security Council page. The paragraph above--with citations to a book or two--would go good on the page National Security Council (Turkey), would you agree? But we need to cite to a published book that describes the history. Does that make sense? You know this area better than I. Do you know of a scholar who wrote a book about the history you told me above?

By the way, would you do me a favor and register with a WikipediaName so that you would have your own TalkPage? See the "log in" in the upper right of your screen? And then you would have the advantage that you could sign your posts with your name also. Welcome to Wikipedia! Good work. --Rednblu 19:03, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I reorganized the article to reflect it's more category-like status. I hope that it will be expanded upon as a directory of sorts for NSCs in various countries. As for the supposed controversy in China, we definitely need some more background with verifiable information. Thanks. Alcarillo 18:18, 17 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This article seems a bit odd. The different states' NSCs do surely deserve their respective articles. But I don't see the point of this article. How about converting it into a disamb. page? Bertilvidet 19:19, 17 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm beginning to agree with you. Let country-specific information be covered in articles specifically related to that country's NSC. But I feel it may be important to at least have some sort of intro like what's there now. Then it could follow with a country-by-country list... Alcarillo 19:55, 17 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bertilvidet I see that you removed the cleanup tag. I concur. Alcarillo 14:33, 19 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I now see that this article is part of a larger editing war that I'm not going to get dragged into. Anyway... So I reorganized the article to make it even more neutral and (hopefully) encyclopedic. I generalized content about institutions with similar names, simplified the overall content, and repurposed the text concerning a possible NSC for China (still not verified, BTW) to Central Military Commission. Alcarillo 18:01, 18 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I believe the article is better now, short and consice with link to relevant country articles. Maybe the middle section, about the US NSC should go?? Let's discuss the single country articles at their respective talk pages. Thanks. Bertilvidet 14:47, 19 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. I'll remove it. Alcarillo 15:05, 19 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The following is what has been removed without the consent of the originial contributor (who was not me) :"There have been instances of national security councils exerting political influence, sometimes in violation of a state's laws or constitution. The most notable in recent U.S. history was during the Iran-Contra Affair when several staffers on the U.S. National Security Council contravened U.S. law and may have conducted policy without presidential approval." I think, at least in respect to the contributor, this point should still be in the talk page. By the way, the next better step would be to start integrating the above contribution at the top of the page to the NSC Turkey page by someone (guess who!) instead of throwing tantrums with 'personal attack' (!) blues. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.144.218.21 (talk) 01:32, 21 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Why would you include it in the NSC Turkey page when it pertains to the United States? Even so, that's a discussion for that particular article, not this one. Whatever discussion you're engaged in seems to be Turkey-specific, so I respectfully ask that you take it up with contributor(s) for those relevant articles, not for this one. I also suggest you set up a username with Wikipedia and become a trusted contributor yourself. Alcarillo 14:22, 23 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I dont mean to be insensitive and stubborn here and it is taking too long to explain the same thing but please see my note in the articles in the log history which goes (As you can see my edit history, I am trying to re-establish some good contributions at some very polarized articles and this si the same posting inviting a more open approach. Not so sure what is happening here with seemingly good suggestions being deleted back and forth. I find these changes useful and I believe they should be available to users. I guess that would be the fair thing to do. I think if the mentioned individuals believe that the log history given is inaccurrate, they should rather clarify it here rather than reversing everything. At least, I agree with the suggestions in the main block of the text as worthwhile and they are now my contributions. Hope to see some consensus here.) Perhaps, and quite rightfully, the sentences where any personal attack is percieved can be cleaned out rather than wholesale deletes. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 160.79.139.10 (talk) 16:53, 18 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not so sure what is happening here with seemingly good suggestions being deleted back and forth. I find these changes useful and I believe they should be available to users. I guess that would be the fair thing to do. I think if the mentioned individuals believe that the log history given is inaccurrate, they should rather clarify it here rather than reversing everything. At least, I agree with the suggestions in the main block of the text as worthwhile and they are now my contributions. Hope to see some consensus here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 160.79.139.10 (talk) 16:53, 18 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The below legitimate edits to the National Security Council (Turkey) page by various authors have been vandalized and reverted with no discussion or agreement by the following acts by the users: 07:06, 16 August 2006 Bertilvidet, 17:34, 19 August 2006 Bertilvidet , 22:19, 20 August 2006 Khoikhoi

The National Security Council (Milli Güvenlik Kurulu (MGK) in Turkish) is a powerful body that unites the top civilian and military leaders, and issues state recommendations with the democratic government upon all matters deemed pertinent to the policies of the Turkish Republic. The creation of the MGK was an outcome of the reformation of The National Defense Supreme Council that had been in service since 1949 which was originally formed as The Supreme Defense Assembly in 1933 and was formally re-established in December 1962 under the organizational structure and name of The National Security Council in accordance with the 1961 Constitution. The National Security Council, composed of the Prime Minister, Chief of the General Staff, Deputy Prime Minister, Ministers of National Defence, Internal Affairs, Foreign Affairs, Finance, Transportation and Labor as well as Chief of Staff and Commanders of the Army, Navy, Air Forces and Gendarmarie under the chairmanship of the President of the Republic, assists the cabinet of Council of Ministers in decision making process related to national security issues and providing necessary coordination. The Council takes its decisions with majority vote. Decisions for recommendations made by voting have no binding power. In the absence of the President, the council would meet under the chairmanship of the Prime Minister. Depending on the agenda, Ministers and experts from various institutions would attend to the meetings of the Council upon Prime Minister’s invitation. Duties of the National Security Council were listed in the law under main headings on the issues of the advisory decisions pertaining to the formulation, establishment and implementation of the national security policy and ensuring the necessary coordination in order to preserve the existence and independence of the State, the integrity and indivisibility of the country and the peace and the security of society. Duties of MGK — Preceding unsigned comment added by 160.79.139.10 (talk) 16:53, 18 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The most immediate attention required appears to be at the NSC Turkey site; if people feel that this NSC disambiguation page requires attention, please feel free to re-add the tag, but say what and which part needs attention Buckshot06 06:01, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]