not provided. Stinnett goes on to write, "throughout 1941, it seems, provoking Japan into an overt act of war was the principal policy that guided FDR's actions against Japan" and "Roosevelt's cabinet members, most notably Secretary of War Henry L. Stimson, are on record favoring the policy, according to Stimson's diary". Further evidence that suggests Roosevelt had seen the memos was his support of "pop-up" cruises, an elaboration upon Actions D and E of the eight recommended actions detailed in the memo: "I just want them to keep popping up here and there and keep the Japs guessing. I don't mind losing one or two cruisers, but do not take a chance on losing five or six." Admiral Husband E. Kimmel, on the other hand, opposed the "pop-up" cruises, saying they were "most ill-advised and will result in war if we make this move", but "the decision [on the 'pop-up' cruise matter] may go against me". In fact, at the time, Kimmel was not aware of Washington's eight-action policy. Admiral James O. Richardson also opposed the plan and "quoted the President as saying: 'Sooner or later the Japanese would commit an overt act against the United States and the nation would be willing to enter the war'." Also, Admiral Nimitz turned down the command of the Pacific Fleet so that he would not become the scapegoat if the Japanese attacked the United States by surprise. In a History Channel interview, Admiral Chester Nimitz Jr. described his father's political maneuver: He said, 'It is my guess that the Japanese are going to attack us in a surprise attack. There will be a revulsion in the country against all those in command at sea, and they will be replaced by people in positions of prominence ashore, and I want to be ashore, and not at sea, when that happens.' The characterization of the McCollum memorandum as a recipe for war was not accepted by U. S. Army military historian Conrad Crane, who wrote: A close reading shows that its recommendations were supposed to deter and contain Japan, while better preparing the United States for a future conflict in the Pacific. There is an offhand remark that an overt Japanese act of war would make it easier to garner public support for actions against Japan, but the document's intent was not to ensure that event happened. See also Day of Deceit: The Truth