Talk:National security council

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

Start

This article has been rated as Start-class on the project's quality scale.

This article has not yet been checked against the criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar and style: not checked Supporting materials: not checked	To fill out this checklist, please add the following code to the template call: \| b1<!--Referencing and citation--> = <yes/no> \| b2<!--Coverage and accuracy --> = <yes/no> \| b3<!--Structure --> = <yes/no> \| b4<!--Grammar and style --> = <yes/no> \| b5<!--Supporting materials --> = <yes/no> assessing the article against each criterion.

Additional information:
/
	This article is not currently associated with a task force. To tag it for one or more task forces, please add the task force codes from the template instructions to the template call.

==

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

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.

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]