Despite many important findings in the study of cognitive approaches to decision-making, much remains unclear. Rather than asking why decision-makers made a particular choice, this thesis is interested in asking how such decisions are warranted by the speakers, how potential criticisms are averted, and how such decisions establish a particular self-image. The purpose of this thesis, then, is to deconstruct the American belief system and its images, and trace their expression in political discourse. The central argument suggests belief systems and images enable, reflect, and warrant foreign policy decisions, and requires a link be made between International Relations and political and social psychology. Building on a neo-classical realist framework, but incorporating the discourse analytic unit of the interpretative repertoire to examine political discourse, the thesis will demonstrate the empirical and theoretical validity of the argument with a case study of the Clinton Administration. The findings suggest that, while much remains to be done in the field, International Relations can successfully incorporate political and social psychological concepts to illustrate how belief systems and images enable, narrow, and reflect on policy options.