It would be foolish to think that one can supplant the other. Still, that does not imply that there may be no situations in which one class of weapons could be used exclusively. The US also can adopt a policy that dispels the notion that the adoption of disabling systems into our arsenal implies weakness or a lack of will to use more lethal weaponry when necessary. The US will continue to take seriously its obligations as a superpower and the leadership role that comes with that position. Yet, the addition of another class of weaponry into the arsenal to make war less bloody and less destructive does not necessarily mean we should be more willing to become the world's policeman.
Technology sometimes forces a change in a military's doctrine.
Both paragraphs have importance for disabling systems. Some systems in this class may not have the effect of influencing an adversary's capability and will and therefore should bear serious consideration before proceeding to production and deployment. Some disabling systems are not precise in the terms of the precision guided munitions used during Desert Storm. Yet, these systems still require precise intelligence and effective command and control to be employed effectively in a military operation. Otherwise the enemy would not give in but would wait for things to improve.