Documents / Document

The Army Air Forces in World War II, Vol. 1 (archived PDF)

Air Force Historical Studies Office · 863 pages · text from the file's own layer

This is Volume One of The Army Air Forces in World War II, titled Plans and Early Operations, January 1939 to August 1942, edited by Wesley Frank Craven and James Lea Cate. The University of Chicago Press first published it in 1948, and the Office of Air Force History reprinted it in 1983. The front matter explains how the AAF historical program was set up during the war. The index covers Pacific, Atlantic and European operations, and nothing in the text concerns unidentified aerial phenomena.

  • p. 258 …order to achieve this end we should cooperate with Japan fully un- quote.” Then: “ I 3…
  • p. 345 …seater aircraft operated by inexperienced personnel in cooperation with antiaircraft search- lights.” la‘ Many important objectives…
  • p. 425 …with brilliant judgment who must rely on cooperation,” * the ARCADIA conference of the British and American…
  • p. 566 …joined at Dinjan by Col. Merian C. Cooper. The task confronting them, to say the le…
  • p. 596 …There had even been talk of “mutual cooperation” rather than “unity of command.” Some firm decision…
  • p. 629 …the British Isles, to “operate independently in cooperation with the British Bomber Command.” l o Detailed…
  • p. 679 …the fullest agreement with the methods of cooperation which you propose and supremely confident that, at…
  • p. 793 …1942. 36. Ibid. 37. Col. Merian C. Cooper, Briefing 7'8 Officer, First Special Aviation Project…
  • p. 802 …Mar. 1943; talk by Col. M.C. Cooper in Gen. Johnson's Staff Meeting, 2 3…
  • p. 846 …5 5 2 Coolidge, President, 25, 28 Cooper, Col. M.C., 499 Coral Sea. Battle of…
T H E A R M Y A I R F O R C E S I N W O R L D W A R I 1
GYMNAST, and the build-up of the AAF striking force in England.
Such changes in scheduled air deployments and the strategy implied
thereby were vigorously opposed by the AAF-first by General
Arnold in a White House conference on 6 March, and later in a more
elaborate statement prepared by the Air Staff and incorporated into
the President’s reply.ls In general the Air Staff‘s stand was for con-
centration, against dispersal, of forces; specifically, it advocated send-
ing minimum reinforcements to the Pacific and Middle East and
throwing into England all units previously intended for GYMNAST
and MAGNET. This attitude followed that currently entertained by
the War Department; essentially based on the strategy of ABC-r as
modified a t ARCADIA, Army planning in February and March was
more deeply concerned with the Russian front than with possible
dangers in the Middle East.
The situation on the eastern European front was difficult to evalu-
ate in Washington. Early pessimism concerning the Soviets’ chance
of survival had been somewhat allayed by their successful defense of
Leningrad and Moscow, and by their winter counteroffensive. But
it was understood that the German withdrawal had not been the rout
described by Moscow, and it seemed highly probable that with spring
Hitler would try to finish off the U.S.S.R. before the United States
could bring to bear in Europe its full strength. Earlier plans had con-
ceived the main American effort as an assault on the continent from
bases in the United Kingdom, to be delivered only after a powerful
force had been established there and after Germany had been weak-
ened by an inten’sive bomber offensive. Now it appeared that the
danger of a complete German victory on the eastern front might war-
rant a more immediate diversionary invasion of the continent by a
smaller force. In America, as in Britain, military strategy could not be
divorced entirely from political considerations. Popular demands for
a second front in Europe, already strong in England, were becoming
increasingly vocal in the United States. For national morale, offensive
action on some front was certainly needed. Opponents of the ad-
ministration were critical of the evident determination to subordinate
rhe Japanese to the European war; ignoring the utter impossibility of
getting troops to the Philippines, they coupled demands for the relief
of MacArthur with protests against the dispatch of “large” forces to
the inactivity of Northern Ireland. The decision to have a go at the
Nazis first had been made on sound military grounds, but it required
5 6 2

About this file

Document, cited by the archive. The PDF is mirrored here; the original link is above. 863 pages are in the text index: search them above, or from the library's search.