Every one of these potential attacks would require a lot of things to go very right. It's easy to do X or Y under experimental conditions. The real world is far more chaotic and the odds of success are lower.
Further, none of these things would cause an enemy to capitulate. If an enemy shut off power or caused car crashes in several major cities at once, the US isn't going to just surrender or even think about it. They're going to strike back with the widest array of options for employing force that earth has ever seen. Every option you listed would be pin pricking a giant.
Cyber warfare is super cheap, but it's also orders of magnitude less effective than sustained aerial bombardment or a complete naval blockade. Another tool in the tool chest, but not something I would base my national defense on
The difference is that the US homeland isn't used to feeling repercussions for it's foreign policy and aggression abroad. The US populace most certainly isn't hardy enough to suffer through extended power, water and connectivity outages because of diplomatic failures. It's not about forcing a surrender, but more about making hostilities and aggression unpalatable to the citizenry.
It's historically rare for homeland "hardship" to be a fast path to victory. More likely it would induce a total war mentality and calls for reprisal attacks.
The British aisles hadn't seen war since the 1700s prior to WW1. Neither German strategic bombing in WW1 nor the much larger blitz in WW2 brought about surrender or capitulation.
Yes, this attacks are just the result of sanctions against those countries, we, over here in the US shouldn't be policing the world, if those countries want freedom they should rise up on their own, is hard, but have had happened in the past.
Generally true but there were a few small attacks on the mainland. While they didn't produce much damage they did provoke significant responses, particularly the attack on Ellwood which was used to justify the internment of Japanese Americans.
I mean, if Iran or North Korea directly and intentionally caused even a small forest fire today, no one would say its 'just for show,' but yeah I agree with you.
Further, none of these things would cause an enemy to capitulate. If an enemy shut off power or caused car crashes in several major cities at once, the US isn't going to just surrender or even think about it. They're going to strike back with the widest array of options for employing force that earth has ever seen. Every option you listed would be pin pricking a giant.
Cyber warfare is super cheap, but it's also orders of magnitude less effective than sustained aerial bombardment or a complete naval blockade. Another tool in the tool chest, but not something I would base my national defense on