Sprints can last more than two weeks, so the development team isn't constrained to deliver every two weeks if that doesn't work for them.

People and interactions over processes is probably one of the most important and useful values of the Agile Manifesto, and yet in this article you treat it as if it were an invitation to throw away structure. It isn't. It is simply recognition that not every process or framework will work for every team and every project. For instance, you mention many of the pitfalls of a bad implementation of Scrum and conflate that with Agile, but you can use other frameworks such as Kanban or XP. Agile need not be Scrum, and that Agile principle lets us know that from the start.

I appreciate your thoughts and suggestions, and if all of what you say works for you, congratulations! You have proven the Agile Manifesto correct. Now go out there and deliver results without Scrum. It obviously doesn't work for you. That doesn't mean that it's faulty for others. Also, the issue of an MVP that is never fixed is not an Agile or Scrum problem. A good development team, using whichever method they wish to apply, is aware of their technical debt and should have a Product Owner willing to make space for them to tackle it. If the organization lacks that, it doesn't mean that Agile failed. The organization did.