Systems are complex, so controlling an attack and achieving a desired level of damage may be harder than using physical weapons.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
For example, computer defends well, but for humans its is harder to defend than attack, particularly with the modern time control.
Wars based on principle are far more destructive... the attacker will not destroy that which he is after.
Cyber weapons provide the tantalising possibility of being able to cripple the enemy without inflicting lasting damage on them.
I don't think there's any reason on Earth why people should have access to automatic and semiautomatic weapons unless they're in the military or in the police.
It's easier to fix damage than it is to create it.
What I found personally to be true was that it's easier to manipulate people rather than technology.
It used to be you needed to have a very large sophisticated state before you could even have a nuclear weapon... Now the technology is widespread enough. It doesn't take very many people to be able to cobble together a devastating attack, and all it takes is one.
Every fighter wants to... take the least amount of damage possible.
The problem with cyber weapons for a country like ours is the ability to control them.
The primary factor in a successful attack is speed.