Who cares? In the case of some sort of big war why would you care about "cyber security" when the day to day problem is not dying from starvation, being drafted, radiation posioning or what ever the problem is.
These kind of "we need to prepare" are silly since they implicitly downplay the severity of war and bring us closer to it.
We need to prepare to not be destroyed on the cyber front brings us closer to war? Hard disagree. In a world with sharks, you don't make having to battle a shark more likely by looking less like prey.
Not preparing brings us closer to someone (Russia, China, Iran, ISIS, Al-Qaeda, whoever loses the next presidential election) being able to blackmail society with war-like consequences if we don't do what they want. Worse, more than one adversary could have that level of blackmail on us at once. That's the kind of situation that free peoples fight wars to get out of. And the ones who won't, aren't free for long.
If you consider "not fighting wars" to be more important than "being free", there is nothing more for me to say. And if you think that being free will endure without fighting wars, I think you are hopelessly naive.
The underlying assumption of e.g. food distribution are that a certain part of infrastructure remains intact. This assumption comes into greater question the more individual parts are dependant on large software installations.
E.g. some countries have an entire redundant telecommunications network for government functions precisely so that it can actually withstand such a scenario. The more enmeshed that infrastructure is into other systems the more likely it is that it too will fail.
It is incredibly hard to maintain an unused system. The Internet is the default mode of communications because it outperforms all other options on most metrics. Any backup would go nearly totally unused and therefore couldn't be effectively used during an outage.
These kind of "we need to prepare" are silly since they implicitly downplay the severity of war and bring us closer to it.