An ideal signal that you want to approximate may contain infinite frequency components, but this property alone is not what gives you aliasing artifacts. Sampling incorrectly does. You can absolutely approximate this signal without aliasing artifacts, but you need to sample a band-limited approximation of the signal, not the signal itself. That's what BLEP does.
Attempting to sample the ideal signal directly (the naive approach) will indeed give you aliasing artifacts. But we already know that the ideal signal isn't band-limited, so we should also know that sampling it directly (at any frequency) is always folly.
Do you see what I was trying to highlight? "Oh no, the signal has high frequency components!" is not the problem. Incorrect sampling is the problem. Aliasing is an effect, not a cause. You don't "get aliasing" just because the ideal signal has high frequency components, you get aliasing because you sampled the wrong thing.
You can call it aliasing if you want... you wouldn't be wrong. It's just not particularly instructive, and referring to everything as aliasing without being more specific about where it's coming from is what leads people down rabbit holes like running a DAC at 2+ MHz because nobody showed them how to use a polyphase filter. Sure, it works, it's just wasteful, and you can accomplish the same thing by sampling better rather than faster.
Then again, your condescending response leads me to believe that you're not actually interested in being instructive.