Is Cyber a new warfare? Debate (catch all)

[Cannoneer No. 4]

This is a technological fallacy that most people don't understand until they've been exposed to a few others. Examine the common phrase "guns don't kill people, people kill people". Though concretely incorrect (the person is a secondary actor to the technology) the same exact linkages can be made for cyber.

Guns, howitzers, mortars, and small arms usually only kill people by accident. It's projectiles launched from these pieces and the damage they inflict upon human bodies that kills. The ballistic trajectory of these projectiles runs through the domain of the air, but that does not make them aircraft.

If, as an example I remotely turn off your pacemaker via wireless signals, does the end result not count because it wasn't a bullet?

Nope, doesn't count as a kinetic kill, or even as a homocide unless somebody investigates my death and can prove you turned off my pacemaker. I'll still be dead, but my death won't be counted as a cyberwar KIA if you cover your tracks right.

If I use a high bandwidth command and control system to run a predator drone that rains missiles down that isn't cyber, but if I hack back on that predator drone and turn it on it's owners is that cyber?

Your Predator's C2 is a computer network subject to attack that requires defense. If you successfully attack the Predator's C2 network and cause it to fire upon friendlies, you can call that cyber if you want. Others might call it CNA or even EW