That is one path but its arguable that its the better path. Weaponizing space has several risks.
One, its VERY expensive, and we have limited resources. If you allocate 5 billion more for space, that costs the Navy a carrier, or the air force its next generation bomber. Its not for free.
Two, if we do have a space war exchange, the high ground now becomes a waste land for all. But we use and need that high ground most, so we stand to lose the most.
Three, weaponizing makes conflict more likely. We, the Russians, and the Chinese have spent huge sums on nuclear forces that we hope to never use. Unlike the nuclear forces, a war in space wont cost lives directly so its easier for one side to pull the trigger. For reason two, our goal is really not to have that conflict. So we would like to avoid, for reason one, spending all that extra national treasure (TAX PAYER dollars) if ultimately we don't want to use it and it could be better spent elsewhere.
MAD has worked partly from the great reluctance to press a button and kill millions of people. But also because millions of your own people will be killed in response. The increasing use of space for peaceful purposes will help bolster a MAD deterrent. Space is very similar to cyber and getting closer to cyber all the time. We don't pretend that cyber can ever be demilitarized. OTOH we do not have MAD for cyber, and it is probably not possible, cyber is too robust. We need to make space similarly robust.