I have said this in many other posts, but yes, Mike was right in killing Fredo. What Fredo said in the boathouse sealed his fate. "I was stepped over...that aint the way I wanted it" meaning he will continue to try to get at the power Mike has until he is six feet under. Sure, he was genuinlly(sp) sorry for what he did, but his feelings of guilt would wear off, and Corleone enemies would know Fredo was the weak spot in the castle wall.He would continue to betrey Mike,intentional or not, until he was taken care of.
And I believe if Vito was in the exact same position, with Paolo risking the lives of his family with his stupidity, Vito would have killed him as well. Killing Fredo was the right move to make.

I disagree with you Sonny, I think most people see this as too much of an all or nothing issue. I mean did Fredo, fuck up? Yes. Did he have selfishness blinding him? Yes. Was he fooled? Yes. I mean it was a mistake and he is his brother afterall. Fredo in my opinion didn't conciously know anything like a hit was about to transpire, neither did Michael. He was therefore fooled and a little foolish for beleiving him. Killing someone is a very extreme way of going about things. He could have simply remained stripped of his his place in the Family business.

I agree that what Fredo said and what was evident to Michael was that Fredo did betray him, but he was fooled into doing it and that sceen in the boathouse where Fredo justified himself was a little nail in his coffin.

However at the same time had Michael used a more open criteria for judging him and was more informed of the facts he would have realized how much of this apparent betrayal was just an accident of being mislead and would have been able to come up with a more amicable solution.

Vito was known as a fair and just man. He in many ways was far more generous and prudent as a judge than the more narrow thinking Michael was about issues of justness. He never punishes someone who doesn't deserve it in any of the material and when he does it's for the greater good.

Even FFC in a recent comment said that in his opinion Michael killed Fredo as a way of perpetuating his ideology because if he hadn't it would be cause a mental imbalance, it would be insane for him not to because it would invalidate all his past choices.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Don Sonny Corleone:
[QB] I have said this in many other posts, but yes, Mike was right in killing Fredo. What Fredo said in the boathouse sealed his fate. "

You got it right, Michael got a confession from Fredo of betrayal as he did in Carlo's case in Part I.

What confession? The only thing that Fredo confessed to was being duped by Hyman Roth and Ola. He did so in the phone call from Ola, as I outlined in my previous post he said they lied to him. What Fredo did say in the boat house was they lied to him. He said they finally offered something to him to sweeten the deal. But at the same time this is not a confession. If it were a confession why would he have to be lied to as he indicated earlier on two occasions int he film? So he either betrayed him or gave some insider info on the compound. The only other evidence we have is his desire to "have something for himself". This would have further clouded his judgement to the motives of Roth and Ola. However, a glossing over of facts and being fooled by someone you readily trusted is not a betrayal.

The qualification for a betrayal is conciously betraying Mike and this cannot be established conclusivly. Infact the evidence that I outlined is far more in the favour of him being fooled into giving privilaged information. Furthermore considering his personality traits which is laid out in the first two movies, it's within his personality to be gullible and niave not conspiring and treacherous.

Okay, assuming he really was duped (that could be a whole 'nother thread in itself), who's to say he couldnt be "duped" again later on?

I agree that subconciously Michael HAD to kill him to ensure that all his "enemies" (in this case, Roth, Pentangeli and Fredo) were dealt with. But realistically speaking if Fredo betrayed him once because he thought he could get a piece of his own, even if he was tricked into believing it, he could do it again later on, something Michael couldn't risk happening.

By the same logic, he didn't have to have Pentangeli commit suicide. Pentangeli was tricked into thinking Michael ordered the hit on him when it was really Roth, just like Fredo was tricked into thinking Michael's agreeing to Roth's terms would benefit the family. Yet I don't think anyone argues that Michael was wrong in having Tom nudge Pentangeli into killing himself. What's the difference? Both were potential enemies of the family, whether they wanted to be or not, and needed to be eliminated to ensure the Family's continued existance.

Underboss...what have you been drinking?

Technically, he didn't have to actually 'confess'...because he knew he was cornered and his BETRAYAL had been discovered.

He committed the BETRAYAL precisely because he was fooled by someone he 'readily trusted', because he was led to believe (told outright) that there would be something in it for him. He sold out his brother for personal gain.

Yes it can. The very fact that he interacted socially with Johnny Ola (who introduced him to the Superman Show), whose boss Hyman Roth was known to be doing business with the Corleone Family...was a betrayal to Mike. Does anyone think Michael would have ok'd this?

Sure he was fooled. Into believing that providing PRIVELEGED INFORMATION would get him somehwhere. Whatever the reason...he did willingly PROVIDE the information. He betrayed his brother for what he believed would be PERSONAL GAIN.

True...and it was in his personality to betray his own brother. He was duped. He was stupid.
He was a traitor.

Fredo's betrayal was consciously motivated. It may have been based on lies he was told, but his belief of these lies motivated him to betray his brother.

Fredo was a traitor. Doesn't matter if he was duped, doesn't matter if he was 'sorry'. He was a traitor.

And Michael was right to have him killed.

Apple

I agree wtih you Wayne who's to say he couldn't be duped again and by that logic, why couldnt' the FBI pressure Pentangeli into confessioning on other charges or what not. Fredo could have made an outsider by the same standard instead of being killed, this would mean he would have bene kept with no insider information.

The Pentangeli situation by the same accord is very ambiguous one. Pentangeli would have been loyal if he wasn't made to think Michael wanted him dead, so he went to pretect himself. Same thing with Fredo with keeping the information underwraps. Pentangeli did prove his loyalty after in court. And it is tragic that Pentangeli gets killed too because he is part of the family and an old time friend. It's even more tragic that Fredo gets killed for being duped and I think it's no mistake that these two situations are so similar.

At the end of GF II Michael is alone and I think it's no coincidence that he is because of what went down earlier in the movie.

Underboss,
You really need to see this film again before you do future posting. The boathouse scene, Fredo indeed told Michael that he actually knew (or confess, whatever word you like the best) Roth/Ola and why he betrayed Michael.

I don't have to go any further, Apple (once again) covered to details brillantly.