THE BLACK HAND FORUM

[quote="OlBlueEyesClub"]Merlino DIDN'T win the war with Stanfa. As Anastasia explains in the Goodfellas Tapes book, after the murder of Mikey Chang, and the attempt on Stanfa in which his son was shot in the face, Merlino and his guys cleared off the street, there was a general feeling that Stanfa was beyond angry, was inconsolable, and would stop at nothing to see Merlino & his closest supporters dead. Anastasia goes as far to imply that Merlino's guys were at that point, scared of Stanfa. Stanfa's group were re-taking the bookmaking operations and other rackets that Merlino's guys had earlier strong armed into kicking up to them, as opposed to Stanfa. And they were doing so without any retribution from the Merlino side. Then due to the long wiretapping operation that the feds had against Stanfa, Stanfa and most of his men were arrested, and thats when Merlino & his guys began hanging out on the streets again. They merely SURVIVED that war, they didn't WIN it, if we're talking about the literal sense of the term, however they definitely benefitted from Stanfa & Co.'s imprisonment.[/quote]

Exactly how it went. FBI saved Merlino's life. I truly think the FBI saves John Gotti's life as well.

[quote="DPG"]Merlino survived and is boss by most accounts, by that thinking we has won. Not in the can for life is a W in my book.[/quote]
But that's not his merit, but the feds' who put Stanfa away. Unless they were paid by Merlino to do so or purposely working in his interests against Stanfa, Merlino can't be credted with this "victory", since it was due to an intervention of a 3rd side (the law enforcement) in the war. Granted, he was either smart or lucky enough to get himself acquitted on the murder charges later, but I think those murders weren't related to the Stanfa war, it was other business of his.

Merlino survived and is boss by most accounts, by that thinking we has won. Not in the can for life is a W in my book.

Merlino DIDN'T win the war with Stanfa. As Anastasia explains in the Goodfellas Tapes book, after the murder of Mikey Chang, and the attempt on Stanfa in which his son was shot in the face, Merlino and his guys cleared off the street, there was a general feeling that Stanfa was beyond angry, was inconsolable, and would stop at nothing to see Merlino & his closest supporters dead. Anastasia goes as far to imply that Merlino's guys were at that point, scared of Stanfa. Stanfa's group were re-taking the bookmaking operations and other rackets that Merlino's guys had earlier strong armed into kicking up to them, as opposed to Stanfa. And they were doing so without any retribution from the Merlino side. Then due to the long wiretapping operation that the feds had against Stanfa, Stanfa and most of his men were arrested, and thats when Merlino & his guys began hanging out on the streets again. They merely SURVIVED that war, they didn't WIN it, if we're talking about the literal sense of the term, however they definitely benefitted from Stanfa & Co.'s imprisonment.

In Merlino and Stanfa's case, I am not sure Merlino would have won, the war didn't really have time to escalate, Stanfa killed 2 or 3 Merlino's men, Merlino killed 1 or 2 (don't remeber the names, have to re-read the articles and books) and there were sever failed attempts to kill. Then Stanfa and most of his supporters were arrested, went to prison for life and Merlino took the vacant spot by default. It would be interesting to know who would have won if the feds hadn't interfered. Both Stanfa and Merlino seem quite dumb to me to be honest, if the descriptions in books and documentaries are accurate. Stanfa makes a former cop a made member (Ron Previte) and sends Raymond Esposito to carry out the Mario Riccobene hit, even though Esposito is blind on one eye and doesn't really have a perfect sight on the other either :lol: And Merlino acts like John Gotti or Joe Colombo: all flashy, enjoying the cameras and attention (don't know about today, but earlier in a documentary they even showed him giving autographs for a local child who said something like "you are my hero!" :shock: ).

[quote="baldo"]I think it comes down to this: No matter how established you are and no matter how much experience you have, no one is bulletproof...literally.[/quote]
That's right of course, but the younger ones aren't bulletproof either. Muscles are not enough to protect from bullets, and no quick reaction is quick enough to dodge a bullet. The triggermen who carry out the hits are always young anyway, no matter whether they work for an old boss or a young one. The only case I know about when triggermen were old (over 70) was the 1976 attempt on Ernie Kanakis in Detroit, and of course they botched the hit, the target killed all 3 in self-defence.

I think it comes down to this: No matter how established you are and no matter how much experience you have, no one is bulletproof...literally.

But then theres also the off shoot of younger generation guys that just inherit there spot. I.e. jnr gotti. Persico jnr. Bill bonanno. Scarfo jnr

Sent from my LGMS330 using Tapatalk

Also merlino vs stanfa.

Id say that the younger guys generally have the upper hand when it comes to hostile take overs.

Just for the simple fact that generally to even be in that situation the younger generation
A) would have to have enough power to have a backing against the older guys. So that shows they must want the title and arw willing to fight for it.
B) they must have some hitter on there side or otherwise the older guys would just take them out.
C) younger guys tend to be a better recruiter then a geriatric gangster... I get there older n wiser but theyre on there way out..


Sent from my LGMS330 using Tapatalk

I remember I had already made a topic about this when we still had the older forum, have recently read again something concerning the subject, so here an argument for discussion if you are interested:

I noticed that when an older gangster gets in a serious confrontation with a younger, upcoming and ambitious one, the older one very often loses. Mostly that happens in fiction, but in real life there were many examples too, so many that I can’t even call that “unrealistic”, even though I initially thought that theoretically such outcomes should be unlikely, if I hadn’t followed the real-life chronicles and faced the facts.

What I mean is that, in an underworld war, if we are talking about bosses, not soldiers, theoretically the one who has more experience should win, not some young hot-head who is new to the concept of facing serious rivals. If a mafia boss has lived to an old age, that means he has much experience, has learned from past mistakes, and has killed many rivals who tried to kill him with different methods. If he survived all that, that means he knows what to do if somebody attacks him with one of the same methods and strategies. Young gangsters, on the other hand, have ambition and ruthlessness, but if they are rather new to the concept of war/eliminating rivals, how do they manage to take over? Especially considering the fact that hot-headed people are often overconfident and this theoretically should make them vulnerable.

Of course, if it was a direct physical confrontation, only the young one could win: he is stronger, faster and has quicker reactions. But the situations I am talking about aren’t like boxing rings; this is about planning strategies and giving orders. Theoretically, in such cases, experience that comes during the passing of years, with age, could be the decisive factor. If an old and experienced boss isn’t yet tired of life and want to go on, he apparently would be less likely to make a mistake than a younger one who hasn’t yet faced that many situations, betrayals and different methods used to try to kill him. So how do they win nevertheless? Just to make random examples where younger ones defeated older ones even though the old ones were by no means tired or willing to retire:

[b]Sal Montagna vs Nick Rizzuto[/b]

[b]John Gotti vs Paul Castellano[/b]

[b]Lucky Luciano vs Salvatore Maranzano[/b]

[b]Albert Anastasia vs Vincent Mangano[/b]

[b]The De Stefano brothers vs Antonio Macri’ and Mico Tripodo in the Calabrian ‘Ndrangheta during the 70s[/b]. Well, Giorgio De Stefano was later killed by Mommo Piromalli, an older boss, but still, he had to do it with much caution and had to sacrifice the triggerman Giuseppe Surace, sent his head to Paolo De Stefano, apologized and said it was Surace’s personal initiative. The De Stefanos on the other hand, killed the old godfathers openly, without fearing retribution or making compromises.

[b]Luigi Boncori vs Angelo Ciraulo in Ravanusa, Sicily (Agrigento province)[/b]. That was just luck, theoretically Ciraulo (who was 80 years old by the time, but still active) could have won, if the triggermen had taken a better shot in their last ambush on Boncori. But they didn’t and Ciraulo was dead soon after.

The same can be said about the other episodes of the Cosa Nostra vs Stidda wars during in the Agrigento province. While some of the founders of the Stidda were former Cosa Nostra made members, expelled by Riina after the Corleonesi take-over, most of them were just common criminals without a good idea of organization, former robbers, drug addicts, often not even 30 years old etc. Yet, this disorganized mass of street gangs managed to kill Giuseppe Di Caro, who was an experienced regional mafia commission member for the province of Agrigento, and they killed many other bosses. I read in a book (forgot the title, but can check it online if you want) that mentioned those statistics in the first 90s. The author says that, when he read them, it was very noticeable that most of the mafia murder victims in those years were older bosses of the Cosa Nostra, all eliminated by the Stidda. Not even by other mafia families, but by the Stidda, which wasn’t even a real organized crime network, but something like the Bloods and Crips in America, in terms of organization.

Sorry for the long post, but I am curious about your opinion: how the hell does that happen? Doesn’t experience mean anything not even in matters that don’t require physical confrontation (the only circumstance where the younger one obviously has the upper hand)? In the 3rd Godfather movie it seemed a sort of paranoia: Vincent strikes against high ranking and lower-ranking criminals all over the world, not just in America: mafia rivals in USA, freemasons in Italy, international bankers, the Vatican, and still gets no retaliation after breaking the balance in the crime world of almost the whole planet. I thought that was just a sort of fantasy, made up without much thought, but after reading real life organized crime chronicles, it doesn’t seem so unlikely anymore. Maybe it doesn’t happen on a global scale, but on a smaller one those young gangsters win all the time, even though they are no masterminds and win only by being ambitious and ruthless. That is real, but still makes no sense: doesn't the experience of the older ones help in any way? Or maybe with age they become senile and paranoid? But it’s one thing at 90s years, it’s another at 68 or 70. Carmelo Colletti from Ribera (again, Agrigento province) started his mafia career for real by making a bloodbath and becoming the representative for the province, when he was already over 60. Yet, even he was later killed by younger upstarts.