Uh oh, we're both about to date ourselves.
The radial vs bias ply alignment changes were an extremely subtle thing - much of it urban legend but also some truth to it. The truth part was that the older bias ply tires were not as directionally stable and often wandered one direction or the other due to a tire property called conicity and manufacturing variation. To fix it, alignment guys in "the day"

would indeed add some toe in and trade off some wear for the stability of two tires gently pushing against each other. Radial tires brought new construction techniques as well as generally higher production quality and consistency that eliminated this need fairly quickly.
Regarding changes to actual suspension geometry from mere rolling resistance changes, I'll continue to disagree that's an issue. If that small a force (perhaps 7ft lbs of torque at the contact patch) could move suspension parts around, consider what max braking would do with perhaps 200 ft lbs of torque - you'd never stop in anything close to a straight line. In that scenario, things in the suspension would be wobbling all over the place - IFS or solid axle. They're much stouter than that.
Ironically, this is one of the things I'll want Drexx to check - tightness of suspension components, bushing condition etc but I guess we'll have to wait 'til he's back from jumping the truck over another sand dune to find out......
Having said all that, it's always amazed me how well long distance truck tires can wear, with some of them warranted over 100,000 miles I've heard. Sounds like you've had some experience in this realm. Incredible.
Doug