Is it easy to keep Alaska and Hawai'i from becoming states?

As for your points... The Japanese invaded a few remote islands in the Aleutians which amounted to nothing; the resources were better spent further south. Any invasion would require an even more successful Japan, and the probability of Japan doing even better in WW2, much less winning, has been argued in other threads many times over. Pearl Harbor itself was another massive gamble. The prospects of an invasion of the Hawaiian islands are just as farfetched as Alaska in WW2.

I still like the suggestion of evacuating Alaska, letting the Japanese have it. By the time the Japanese are able to complete the equivalent to the Alcan Highway from North end in order to invade the Contiguous US (Lower 48), it will be the grandchildren of the original solders, and they will all speak English.
 
Neither were incorporated territories. And as I stated the UN had them both on their list of non-self-governing nations that the UN wanted the "colonial power" to either give independence or incorporate as part of the national govt (in US case statehood).

In 1958 both Alaska and Hawaii were organized (governed by an organic act), incorporated (part of the integral national territory of the US) territories. They had the same legal status of any other territory prior to statehood.

Puerto Rico*, Guam and the US Virgin Islands were organized, unincorporated territories (not part of the national territory of the US, but instead possessions, but governed under Acts of Congress that function as their constitutions).

American Samoa was an unorganized, unincorporated possession governed by the Navy with an appointed civilian Govenor.

All of this came about because of the insular cases around the turn of the last century.

*PR's Commonwealth Status is a special case.
 
Top