I can see you have hard time understanding the fundamental cause of this issue. You have an axle attached to your frame. You have wheels attached to the axle. These wheels go over a bump and the impact is absorbed by the shocks. This is when all is good and well. Now, in a case where one of the components becomes loose, it can make the entire axle act as a "shock absorber", and will cause the uncontrollable shaking of the wheels. Find the loose component, tighten it up or replace it, and problem goes away. Obviously, people who don't understand the issue will blame it on the "mice" or whatever demon they fear living inside the axle.
Duh, sorry, was too busy cleaning washer fluid out of my gas tank to respond sooner. All these different fluids are just so confusing.
Based on your "explanation" it should be easy enough then to produce this effect on any vehicle, as they all have "Wheels, Axles and Shocks". So go on and try to make this happen on a vehicle with an independent front suspension. You may get shimmy, vibrations, poor handling, tire wear and wander, but not the infamous "death wobble" because without a solid front axle you cannot get into the positive feedback loop that can literally shake your front end apart. In this situation the axle isn't "acting as a shock absorber" because the solid design doesn't really attenuate the oscillations (as an independent suspension would), it just transfers them from one wheel back to the other. As you mention below, its physics.
Yes, just like unicorns, flawless vehicles don't exist. There are so many things that can go wrong: fuel problems, ignition problems, starter problems, cooling problems, internal engine problems, transmission problems, etc, etc, etc. I suggest you steer clear of any machinery that uses these technologies, because every single one of them experiences them. Instead, gather a big group like yourself and file a lawsuit against the laws of physics.
I've never claimed that there are flawless vehicles, so I'm not sure what strawman you're off arguing with. Yet, wait a sec, I thought you said this wasn't a flaw or problem, just stupid people who never bother to maintain their vehicle. I know this may come as a shock to you, but while all cars have wheels, engines and transmissions, they can actually be different from one another. Some cars have little engines, some have big engines, some aren't even cars (they have these big boxes on the back). Some have 2 seats, some 4, some (and I know it may be hard to believe) seat 6 or more. Some of these vehicles are more reliable, some are less reliable. Some vehicles do certain things well and other things not so well. Some even have well known issues and flaws (before 2006 the Xterra had issues with the "Strawberry Milkshake of Death" where engine coolant would get into the transmission).
It's not a design trade off. It's something you don't understand and, hence, label it as a "design trade off".
"Trade off - A situation that involves losing one quality or aspect of something in return for gaining another quality or aspect."
This is pretty much a textbook case of a design trade off. Chrysler also admits that it's a design trade off and was seriously considering introducing an independent front suspension on the 2017 Wrangler (just like they have in every other model of Jeep). This of course had many in the Jeep community up in arms, as they are willing to "trade off" the increased risk of speed wobble and poorer on-road handing (i.e. losing one quality or aspect of something), in exchange for the better off-road articulation and upgradability it provides (in return for gaining another quality or aspect). Just like with the Xterra there is a "trade-off" with increased fuel consumption in exchange for a body on frame design that's better off road.