this "war". The people involved seem to depend on the inherent stupidity of the US public, for example not even knowing where Albania is.

You can make a good comparison therefore with the slogan of the party in 1984: "War is peace. Freedom is slavery. Ignorance is Strength." Ignorance on the part of the public gives strength to political opportunists who can exploit that ignorance for their own means.

Another telling quote is:

In the end the Party would announce that two and two made five, and you would have to believe it. It was inevitable that they should make that claim sooner or later: the logic of their position demanded it. Not merely the validity of experience, but the very existence of external reality was tacitly denied by their philosophy.

This strikes at the heart of this theme of the manipulation of truth and how the party and politicians are able to make us believe things that just aren't "true" - the whole concept of "truth" becomes a contested issue.

That should give you a start - all the best!

Orwell’s Oceania is a state that exists on fabrication. The general population is clearly unaware of the true mechanics of government, and their own history has been altered to better apply to their present war-mongering administration. Winston’s job is to literally rewrite history in order to smooth out any inconsistencies with the government’s narrative. In a similar fashion, “Wag the Dog” takes the viewer behind the scenes to watch a war developed as a narrative to present to the American people, based on lies which serve to enhance the voters’ perceived need for the preservation of the current administration. While Winston unwittingly rewrites the past, Conrad Brean’s job is to knowingly rewrite the present, and convince Americans that what they see on their television screens are true events which necessitate some action from the presidency. By manipulating the story of a war and its causes, both governments represented in these texts are perpetuating the need for war, and therefore, maintaining their government’s control over the people.

I think that one significant point of similarity between Orwell's work and Levinson's film is the development of war as "the health of the state."  Both works understand war as a way to maintain control and silence dissent amongst their respective body politics.  In Orwell's dystopic vision, the government of Oceania is in perpetual war to ensure that there is complete obedience and submission to the state.  In Levinson's black comedy, if the public is distracted with a war there is a greater chance they will not scrutinize the actions of the President, thereby ensuring that the "tail can wag the dog."  Another similarity between both is that war is used to not only silence public dissent but substantiate existing Status Quos.  Both forms of government face fundamental challenges from its people if war is not evident.  Big Brother would face stiff resistance from the citizens if it is not able to scare them into submission with the notion of war.  At the same time, Conrad Brean understands that the construction of a war will guarantee his President a second term as it would be unwise "to change horses midstream."  In both works, war is seen as a needed element to continue the Status Quo and justify its existence.