It's a moral mess, undoubtedly. At the base of it, as I've just remarked on the thread about Pog, we - the viewers - pay for the entertainment, and we like the best entertainers to get paid most so that they stay in the game and entertain us as much as possible. The athletes want to win, and like the idea of getting paid lots of dosh. The sponsors want the spectacle to be successful (so they in turn make lots of dosh), and need stars to fire up the audience - us. It all conspires to put pressure on the riders to use whatever methods their trainers can come up with without asking too many questions.
Individuals like Armstrong are exceptional in that they go beyond the established system and methods and start to blur the lines between puppets and puppeteers. I don't think there ever have been many like him. Are there any now? Who knows.
I have to say that for all I say I don't care and I just want to enjoy the spectacle, I do enjoy hypothetical speculation about what might be happening behind the scenes. I generally avoid names, because I simply don't have evidence beyond reported circumstantial, and I don't want to point fingers without a lot more than that. Indeed, I don't want to point fingers at all unless the playing field is tilted outrageously, or people are in danger - and I doubt I'll ever have the information to make those judgements.