Changing of Question

After doing some extensive research toady (as you can tell by the serious increased number of entries in NoodleTools) it has become obvious that I am approaching the problem from an incorrect angle.

After continuous discussions with Mr. Hamilton regarding the MODERN relevance to the question I have decided to take his advice that he gave before and look at the problem instead of World War II but at post 9-11 situations. What inspired this change was the recent NSA controversy and the relevance of the problem. There were continuous mentions to the situation and it's Orwellian like context. However I realized that though this situation was too current and would not be able to be looked at with the proper revisionist standpoint, instead I should look at it post 9/11. This is because following that incident the I found that the US began a "preventative warfare" treaty under George Bush which is exactly what I am exploring in relationship to the War is Peace concept.

This new line of exploration is also much more specific in terms of what to research and especially chronologically I have found that each presidential administration has a similar concept - whether it is Bush's "preventative warfare" or Obama's "war on terror." Therefore at this point I am slightly altering my original question to be "Through a modern historians perspective, to what extent does the analysis of the US's involvement in global affairs post 911 validate the ultimate irony of George Orwell's premise that "war is peace"?"

This easily encapsulates my original ideas as well as utilizes Mr. Hamilton's (my supervisors) advice in relevance of the question to a modern perspective as well as the ability to answer it in a more concise matter.

However in my development of the micro outline (which is consistently being added to below) I realized that I am going to need to broaden out my essay to include not only the correlation the novel has to modern governments but to some of the totalitarian societies that were the context of 1984. Because of the amount of words we are provided I think that this should be fine to include, but I definitely am going to want to make sure Mr. Hamilton looks for / sees the relevance in the inclusion of that beginning bit before I can move on to explain the relevance to modern society and US foreign affairs.