Ninety5rpm said:
Armstrong keenly understands the value of maintaining fan and sponsor interest in the sport, and the contradictory role that doping plays in that. On the one hand it produces inhuman performances, which draws interest and sponsorship funding. On the other hand, when exposed, it reduces interest. So from that perspective what's best for those involved in the sport is really a form of "don't ask, don't tell".
Regardless of how much Armstrong himself participates in doping -- whether it's none, more than anyone else, or anywhere in between -- he is absolutely convinced that the sport is better off the less exposure doping is given, and so he has no tolerance for those who expose it. I don't know if it's fair to say that he tries to "destroy the lives" of those who violate this code, but he certainly tries to do what he can to penalize them for it. Call it childish or heavy-handed if you will, but I don't know of anything that he's done that is illegal or totally inappropriate to these people.
Interesting take on his motivations.
I would suggest however that humans act on self interest, and that in someone like Mr Armstrong, that is taken to its narcissistic extreme. It isn't as though he passively engages the public in any of this. He twitters himself mad each day based on the idea that everyone wants to know his thoughts on everything from Greg Lemond, to the best skin product to use after running with famous celebrities. And obviously, many of you do.
I would also suggest asking the people involved in his vendettas how their lives have been affected. I think the clear anecdotal evidence is that your life in cycling becomes hard to impossible if someone such as Mr Armstrong decides you are outside. To suggest that he is just another rider protecting what is his is disingenuous and purposefully avoidant of the power someone with that much money has.
Add to all of that the manner in which he and his sponsors have used his cancer to enrich themselves, and you will have to excuse me if I don't think there is much value to his contribution to cycling or anything else.
As for the "hater" tag, it is an over simplification used by those who would rather use rhetoric rather than logic and facts. I understand that also, as hero worship is a necessity for people whose lives are devoid of personal satisfaction. (ninety, that isn't directed towards you as you were respectful and thoughtful in your response)
As to jackhammer's typically ignorant response (the number of times you stupidly fall into asserting thoughts that are clearly ignorant and easily refuted it amusing. See just about any thread for clarification.), well, I really intended to address the author of the thread in a respectful manner. I guess this is all a game of "Gotcha" favored by people with simple minds and opinions for you, so I will leave it and move on to discussion with people who have thoughtful ideas to present.