I think we're at an impasse, but I'm enjoying the debate so I'll give it one more try...
...You both base your opinions on the concept that treachery cannot be forgiven.
Sorry, but I never based my opinion on that, it was PB who offered the quote.
Yes, but earlier in the thread you wrote, "The point is he handled Fredo's betrayal the way it had to be handled. By eliminating the traitor." That seems to me to be roughly equivalent to my summation, albeit in different words.
This had nothing to do with 'forgiveness'. It's quite possible Michael forgave Fredo once Connie spoke to him. But that would not change the what Fredo had done, and what it almost cost. Also...again, Fredo could have been quite docile in the aftermath of having been taken back in, but may have returned to his resentful, uneasy state in years to come. The chance could not be taken.
But that's my point - that the chance
was taken by Michael. He gave Fredo an indefinite lease on life. Mama could have lived for 20 more years. I see that as a clear repudiation of your assertion that Fredo was a continuing threat. You don't seem to factor that into your analysis.
And nobody has yet answered Olivant's question abuot what possible value Fredo in exile would have had to another Family.
Look...all of you who make those 'strong' cases for allowing Fredo to live are doing it for one reason, and one reason only...because he was Michael's brother. If he were not, no one at all would have a problem with what happened.
This was business, and you're all makin it personal.
Apple
True, I think it was all personal. And I agree that Fredo being Michael's brother should have made a difference, but only becuause he could be neutralized in other ways.
