What if the Japanese accidentally raided Ulithi after WWII?

During World War Two, the Japanese had a plan to send submarines carrying Aichi M6A attack seaplanes to raid the Panama Canal. But by the time the submarines, aircraft and crew were ready for this plan, Japan was on the brink of invasion and the target was switched at the last minute to Ulithi Atoll, where carriers and other ships of the American fleet was assembled. The four submarines (with six aircraft, painted to look like USN planes) had already departed (on July 23) when they were sent a signal on August 16 to call off the attack because the war was over.

What if some combination of confusion and bad luck led to that message not being sent?

So in late August or early September 1945, (Sept. 2 for double irony!) six seaplanes disguised as American aircraft fly over Ulithi and start bombing and strafing the ships and facilities. An aircraft carrier is badly damaged and a number of transports are sunk or damaged. The number of casualties is several hundred.

How plausible is this scenario? There would certainly not be a return to hostilities, but what would be the repercussions? Also, tell me if you think that any Americans would not believe the Japanese when they would say that they "forgot" to call off the attack.
 

Anaxagoras

Banned
This kind of thing happens in war. I think the Americans would just be happy that everything was over. They might even officially act as though the attack never took place.
 
Wouldn't be the first time that a comms snafu caused a battle to be fought after an armistice/surrender. Somehow I doubt the Allies would restart the war over this.
 
Wouldn't be the first time that a comms snafu caused a battle to be fought after an armistice/surrender. Somehow I doubt the Allies would restart the war over this.

They should totally occupy Japan for the next ten years.... oh wait.
 
They should totally occupy Japan for the next ten years.... oh wait.

Harsher war crime trials? I'm pretty sure that announcing that you're surrendering, and then attacking that nation you're surrendering to, is a breach of Geneva.
 
If you can prove it was an accident?

They killed several hundred Americans... after they announced that they had surrendered. That is going to provoke bad blood, even if its been proven to be "an accident".

Though if hard feelings will be anymore worse than OTL is hard to say; the outcome of the Chinese Civil War, and the Korean War shouldn't be butterflied away by this incident, the United States will still want a strong springboard in Asia to counter communism to sweep this under a rug.
 

Warsie

Banned
OTL Japanese holdouts kept on fighting for months (actually decades, but most ended after like a few months or years) after the surrender date. In cases, officers and members of the Imperial family were sent by the Allied forces to go personally to garrisons to persuade the soldiers to surrender and that the Emperor mandated it.

EDIT: So some holdouts who did that months after the surrender aren't going to be too much of an extra provocation......
 
During World War Two, the Japanese had a plan to send submarines carrying Aichi M6A attack seaplanes to raid the Panama Canal. But by the time the submarines, aircraft and crew were ready for this plan, Japan was on the brink of invasion and the target was switched at the last minute to Ulithi Atoll, where carriers and other ships of the American fleet was assembled. The four submarines (with six aircraft, painted to look like USN planes) had already departed (on July 23) when they were sent a signal on August 16 to call off the attack because the war was over.

What if some combination of confusion and bad luck led to that message not being sent?

So in late August or early September 1945, (Sept. 2 for double irony!) six seaplanes disguised as American aircraft fly over Ulithi and start bombing and strafing the ships and facilities. An aircraft carrier is badly damaged and a number of transports are sunk or damaged. The number of casualties is several hundred.

How plausible is this scenario? There would certainly not be a return to hostilities, but what would be the repercussions? Also, tell me if you think that any Americans would not believe the Japanese when they would say that they "forgot" to call off the attack.

I agree with the other posts. Nothing would come of it that would significantly alter history. They would probably say 'typical japs'.
 
OTL Japanese holdouts kept on fighting for months (actually decades, but most ended after like a few months or years) after the surrender date. In cases, officers and members of the Imperial family were sent by the Allied forces to go personally to garrisons to persuade the soldiers to surrender and that the Emperor mandated it.

EDIT: So some holdouts who did that months after the surrender aren't going to be too much of an extra provocation......

This is a lot bigger than five guys hiding the Phillippines though.
 
OTL Japanese holdouts kept on fighting for months (actually decades, but most ended after like a few months or years) after the surrender date. In cases, officers and members of the Imperial family were sent by the Allied forces to go personally to garrisons to persuade the soldiers to surrender and that the Emperor mandated it.

EDIT: So some holdouts who did that months after the surrender aren't going to be too much of an extra provocation......
True, but you forgot one teeny thing: a guy kept on fighting until 1973.
 
All else being equal, I'd see harsher war crimes trials.

However, MacArthur would probably still nerf them.
 
Top