[alexander_busek]

“Not part of Japan, but governed by Japan as a temporary trust territory. So, yeah, the Japanese invasion was more like Hitler’s invasion of Austria.”

You are confused. Saipan became part of the US as a trust territory after WWII.

He is not confused. The same Wikipedia article you cite (without attribution) in your next post (8) explains:

In 1914, during World War I, the island was captured [from Germany] by the Empire of Japan, which was awarded formal control in 1918 by the League of Nations as part of the South Pacific Mandate.

So, yes: Japan had received a mandate to govern Saipan.

That the U.S. was later (after WW II) awarded a mandate to govern Saipan does not invalidate Vigilanteman's statement.

Regards,

[Darteaus94025]

Not meaning to extend this cat fight, but:

"In 1914, during World War I, the island was captured [from Germany] by the Empire of Japan, which was awarded formal control in 1918 by the League of Nations as part of the South Pacific Mandate.
So, yes: Japan had received a mandate to govern Saipan."

Seems to me that the crux of the argument hinges on the definition of "captured'. The mandate to govern appears to have been issued after the capture.

Now, we return our FR readers to the 'Saipan capture' catfight already in progress.

[TexasGator]

“That the U.S. was later (after WW II) awarded a mandate to govern Saipan does not invalidate Vigilanteman’s statement.

Regards, “

Regards. He said Japan received Saipan as a temporary trust territory. The League of Nations gave Saipan to Japan as a Mandate. The U.N. gave Saipan to the U.S. as a trust territory.