Eh, USAID is often used as a front for things where they don't want transparency as to where the money is really going. Set up some aid program somewhere that's innocuous looking if dumb on paper, use it as a cover to get CIA into the country.
To be frank, if "did the CIA abuse this program to extend domestic and foreign influence, and interfere with sovereign states' politics?" is our litmus test as to whether a US foreign policy program should continue...we'd better build those mega-walls at the Mexican and Canadian border, mine our shores, and decommission all our radio broadcast towers and satellites to turn ourselves into a first-world North Korea sooner than later. I mean hell, those motherfuckers put spy-cams on pigeons and used them to surveil US citizens for chrissake.
Need I remind you that right now liberals are so brainwormed they're actively defending VoA because Trump threatened to defund it?
Even then I could see a circumcision program in Mozambique reducing HIV transmission, if only because they're doing circumcisions anyways and doing them with sterile tools in a clean environment is going to reduce exposure opportunities while being dirt cheap...
That's where things get considerably more "grey area".
I'm sure Agema would have more to say about this particular point than me, but do you know what else is dirt cheap? Pre- and post-exposure prophylaxis. There are a mountain of logistic and cultural issues atop this -- distrust for Western medicine among indigenous African folks (for good reason), supply chain issues including transportation, storage, and distribution, production chokepoints -- but those extend to practically any form of medical care. The bottom line is it's simply not as profitable as other options for HIV prevention and treatment in Africa. Westerners get the good shit, because we're the ones who pony up the cash and make already-disgustingly wealthy people wealthier in exchange for getting to live.
It also needs be said circumcision is only documented to lower HIV transmission in a single, specific case: female-to-male during PIV sex. As far as anal sex regardless of partner, or any sort of same-sex male activity, there's just not enough information to make a strong claim as most of it is based on extrapolation and assumption. However, it is also documented to lower transmission of certain STI's -- HSV, HPV, BV, trich being the big ones, jury's out on gonorrhea, syphilis, and chlamydia -- from males to females. Those are also more easily treated/cured than HIV of course, but again look to what I said in the last paragraph.
It's a little sus to hyper-focus on the one specific case in which the sexual health of exclusively straight men get protected, while ignoring documented evidence for protecting women's sexual health with the same procedure. Especially when, as you pointed out, complications from that same procedure resulting from substandard tools, methods, and environmental factors are the far bigger problem.
Yeah, they're just cutting off parts of penises, and not necessarily those of babies.
Yep. Once you actually get into sub-Saharan Africa where it's plurality or majority traditional African religion and culture, or Christian-TAR syncretic, circumcision trends towards voluntary and adult as it's considered a rite of passage to adulthood. Which is even more problematic than neonatal circumcision in a lot of ways, not the least is being performed in...considerably less than medically-optimal ways.
Of course, those cultural procedures may or may not involve a lot more than foreskin removal, but that's neither here nor there. Google at your own peril.
Again, just look at the individual policies and ideas the Trump admin has been pushing under the pretext of deporting illegal immigrants, and then imagine the most straightforward abuse of it...
This conversation begins and ends with "non-citizens are entitled to due process". That's the plain language of the Constitution, that's the plain language of every relevant amendment to the Constitution, that was the framers' clear and unambiguous intent, and that's the finding of the judiciary in every case since the country's exception. The one and only exception was slavery, and that being the one and only exception should tell you a whole lot about the worldview of the neo-Nazi shitbags defending Trump's bullshit. Due process is so deeply-ingrained into American policy and jurisdiction even fucking Roger Taney had to bullshit his way around it authoring Dred Scott.