Well, it's worth asking. On the other hand, one rebuttal would go something like:

P1. We should calibrate our tolerance for risk against the level of harm we're addressing.

P2. Mosquitoes are at the high water mark for ongoing harm to humanity.

C. We should be more tolerant of risks here than against any or at least most other problems in the world.

Another rebuttal would be that a survey of leading biologists and entomologists leads to near unanimity that suddenly erasing mosquitoes from the planet wouldn't really have any downsides on the larger ecosystem:

https://www.wnycstudios.org/story/kill-em-all/ https://www.nature.com/news/2010/100721/full/466432a.html

To be fair, note that some rare arctic orchids might be affected: http://www.mosquitoreviews.com/mosquitoes-niche-pollinate.ht...

If you want an updated review of biocontrol more generally, Outside/In has a great episode about it, with interviews with proponents and critics of biocontrol. One takeaway might be that there are a bunch of overlooked success stories, and the widely popularized failures provide a really distorted sample: http://outsideinradio.org/shows/s02e01

On the other hand, it includes interviews with critics of biocontrol as well, so I feel like you could learn more details about both sides of the discussion.

Other contrarian stories about invasives: https://www.wired.com/2011/02/good-invasives/ https://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2014/07/140724-inva... https://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/01/science/invasive-species....

If you want beautiful and complicated historical poetry about a human intervention that lead to a population collapse, The Memory Palace will take you back to the late 1800s: https://player.fm/series/the-memory-palace-110374/episode-13...