Blissful thinking provides security in the minds of people; thus, contentment shadows the real world and the horrors that people often times overlook. Regardless of evidence, logic, or a planned course of action, people, specifically American citizens, allow their government to persuade them to have the mindset that their government has the right course of action in mind. As Plato, a Classical Greece philosopher, deduces in his writing The Allegory of the Cave that people have their "legs and necks chained so that they cannot move, and can only see before them, being prevented by the chains from turning round their heads" (Plato). American citizens have their legs and necks chained, chains constructed by their own ignorance towards the United States government and its rhetoric in times of war and peace, chains that allow American citizens to only see what the government wants them to see. Only by breaking these chains are we able to witness the constant mistakes and manipulations that we had otherwise deemed impossible. The American government used organizations, such as the CIA, to infiltrate media outlets and use reporters for their own gains. The American government uses its rhetoric to convey that their way is the only way; that intervention and war are the only ways to pursue peace and prosperity throughout the world. The American government uses its rhetoric to persuade its citizens to support questionable conflicts, gaining support for conflicts, such as the war in Iraq, to satisfy their own personal agendas. The American government has tapped into the messages of its own citizens in order to monitor and prevent terrorist plots without the consent of the American public. The American government uses its rhetoric to promote war and maintain peace and ignorance within its own borders.

The ignorance American citizens have displayed towards its governments actions has allowed the American government to make questionable decisions while only showcasing the rewards of the operations, rather than their severe consequences. The American government can make such questionable decisions, such as the decision to invade Iraq, with the backing of American citizens through its use of the media to promote war and government policies. The government's ability to use the media is terrifying and the ability of the CIA to use reporters and the media is even more concerning. Carl Bernstein, a now retired investigative journalist and author for the Washington Post, revealed in his article "The CIA and the Media" that, in an effort to gather intelligence, more than 400 American journalists had "secretly carried out assignments for the Central Intelligence Agency, according to documents on file at CIA headquarters" (Bernstein). Although these journalists reportedly were only used in other countries for intelligence gathering, the mere concept of the ability of the CIA to infiltrate and use reporters for their own personal gain is concerning to say the least.

The ability of large organizations and their manipulation of the media to promote government agendas is also quite concerning. The Centre for Research on Globalization, a research and media organization, expressed in its article "War or No War on Syria: Conflict of Interest of 'Experts' who Commented in Favor of Military Intervention" that people like Stephen Hadley, a former national security advisor to George W. Bush, made a series of appearances on multiple news outlets arguing for military intervention. The problem though, as Global Research points out, was that Hadley's audiences were "not informed that he serves as a director of Raytheon" which conveniently is the company that manufactures the weapons that were "widely cited as a weapon of choice in a potential strike against Syria" (Global Research). Hadley was not the only person to promote airstrikes in Syria though as 21 other media commentators and 7 think tanks debated about Syria. The problem is that "[l]ike Hadley, these individuals and organizations have strong ties to defense contractors and other defense- and foreign policy-focused firms with a vested interest in the Syria debate" (Global Research). The ease at which the government can infiltrate, recruit, and gather intelligence through the use of reporters both known and unknown is frightening since Americans cannot know the full extent to which government agencies such as the CIA have gone to gather intelligence both foreign or domestic. The United States government does not have to stop there though in their use of the media for their own private agendas. Companies such as Raytheon can profit from interventions and war and when one of their directors is placed as an advisor to the highest office in the United States and promotes the violence abroad, the agendas of these companies is put into question as manipulators of the American public and politics.

From Iraq to Syria, the conflicts that not only put our nation at risk, but the brave soldiers that fight our battles in a land not their own, the people of America are too easily susceptible to the rhetoric of the government. James Pfiffner, a university professor in the School of Public Policy at George Mason University, in his article "Did President Bush Mislead the Country in His Arguments for War with Iraq" examines the statements made by President Bush and his administration "first, about the implication that there was a link between Saddam Hussein, al Qaeda, and the terrorist attacks of 9/11; second, about Iraq's nuclear weapons capacity; and third, about Saddam's chemical and biological weapons and his ability to deliver them" (25). The links made by the Bush administration were skewed and had little evidence supporting the arguments they were making for war in Iraq. Pfiffner claims that President Bush linked Saddam and the Al-Qaeda hijackers together and "used the implied link to bolster support for war with Iraq in Congress before the authorizing resolution and more generally with the American public before and after the war" (26). The American government led the public to believe in these connections to fuel support for war in Iraq.

The argument though is that some good did come out of the war in Iraq. Oliver Kamm, a lead writer and columnist for The Times, recounts in his article "We were right to invade Iraq" that "[w]e no longer have to bear one major risk: a psychopathic despot," referencing Saddam Hussein, "overcoming a porous sanctions regime, and using oil sales to pay for resumed WMD production" (Kamm). In the end though, America has to ask the question of whether or not the positives outweighed the negative in the decision to invade Iraq and whether or not America will be persuaded by inconclusive evidence brought forth by the government to allow such a mistake to occur again.

A narrow vision clouded the judgment of American citizens and politicians alike, resulting in a war fabricated on the basis of revenge and destruction of all who would bring harm to the United States of America. However, as David Rothkopf, the CEO and editor of the Foreign Policy Group, reveals, in his TED talk "How fear drives American politics," that according to American intelligence services, "on September 11, 2001, there were 100 members of core Al-Qaeda" in fact "[t]here were just a few thousand terrorist" and "[t]hey posed an existential threat to no one" (Rothkopf). Regardless, the United States rushed into the Middle East with the backing of its citizens, resulting in the spread of Al-Qaeda influence into multiple other terrorist organizations, such as ISIS, and instilled hate for a nation seeking revenge on a group of extremists by bombing the homes of innocent people caught in-between the terrorist organizations and the politics of the United States.

After a while though, America realized its mistake in marching into Iraq and began to demand the recall of American troops out of the Middle East. Eventually President Barack Obama did end up withdrawing American troops from Iraq. The problem is, "we have a government that doesn't want to listen" (Rothkopf). Soon after withdrawing from Iraq, President Obama initiated a series of interventions throughout the Middle East from unseating Libyan dictator Muammar Qaddafi to supplying a coalition against rebels in Yemen to continuous airstrikes in Syria. Through fear, the American government is able to convey a sense of urgency to promote its objectives overseas in an effort to destroy the terrorist organizations that would seek to destroy the United States. However, from invading Iraq and even now with the interventionist, America creates a hatred for the west as more groups like Al-Qaeda and ISIS are able to recruit people from all over the world to support their mission in destroying the west. To destroy the country that came in and destroyed their homes and families while leaving with cultural artifacts and tortured citizens.

Although the United States was the main aggressor in the war in Iraq, America was not alone in the conflict or in the deception in leading its country to war. The entrance into Iraq by Great Britain was clouded with promises and hopes for a peaceful resolution through the United Nations that never came to fruition. Eric Herring and Piers Robinson, in their article "Deception and Britain's road to war in Iraq," depicts how there has been a "majority view among the British public that British Prime Minister Tony Blair, in concert with United States President George W. Bush, Jr, lied in various ways to pave the road to war" (Herring and Robinson 214). Through the use of small amounts of unsubstantial evidence, former British Prime Minister Tony Blair, along with United States President George W. Bush, Jr., the two leaders of powerful nations, were able to persuade the citizens of their countries to go to war in search of Iraqi weapons of mass destruction and their capabilities. Also, the alleged workings of peace through the United Nations and Britain's involvement and commitment to these peace talks were greatly exaggerated, leaving Herring and Robinson to share how, through their observations, "[o]thers have listed what they categorize as exaggerations and misreporting, showing the gap between what Blair said and what was true" (Herring and Robinson 214). These general surveys of the British people themselves offers an insight as to the realization of how the public was coerced into fighting an unsubstantiated war. Herring and Robinson also mention how "[o]rganized political persuasion refers to a deliberate and systematic attempt to shape perceptions in order to gain support for a policy" (Herring and Robinson 217), defining the process that former Prime Minister Tony Blair, along with former United States President George W. Bush, Jr., convinced their countries to go to war. Together, they were able to fund, support, and initiate their own war, lying about their intentions and the evidence they actually had.

The United States government has used its rhetoric to convey a sense of fear, anxiety, and ignorance within its own country. From using the likes of the CIA in the media to using false evidence to gain support for war and violent interventions, Americas government has cleverly been able to manipulate its own people to support the questionable decisions elected politicians make on a day to day basis. The American people have to dig deep and strive to find the discrepancies within the rhetoric that the politicians in Washington D.C. spew out. Often times the discovery of these discrepancies are too late, found only after the damage has been done. As Plato stated in The Allegory of the Cave that around those that have their legs and arms shackled "there is a raised way; and you will see, if you look, a low wall built along the way, like the screen which marionette players have in front of them, over which they show the puppets" (Plato). The citizens of America are the ones shackled and the puppeteers are the elected politicians that parade their puppets around, showing only what they want to show to those that have their legs and arms chained down by their own ignorance. America must resolve to break these chains and demolish the wall that the puppeteers in Washington use. Only then will American citizens be able to witness the real dealings behind government policies and decisions and restore their country to that of a peaceful and prosperous United States.

