Is tactics enough to reach 2200+ in rapid?

If not, why not? Chess is 99% tactics

You cannot separate different skills.

When you play puzzles, you know there is an an in-depth move to play for the puzzle

But when you're playing a real game of chess, you do not know when to look into in-depth tactics because you do know there is a tactical move at that moment (Until you face-palm after the game with the engine)

But with time, you start to recognize some patterns and recognition

I'm not sure what your question is, but playing games will improve your rating more so than spending 100% of the time on puzzles

tactics can't replace strategy and strategy can't replace tactics.
You have to distinguish between:
tactics: a short sequence of moves, usually involving an attack or capture, that attempts to make an immediate tangible gain.
strategy: a long term plan or idea.
I disagree with "chess is 99% tactics", I've seen plenty of games that were won by a logical plan and not by tactics.

Chess is not 99% tactics, it is just a saying. There are for example endgame tactics that rather fall under the category of strategy, because needed to be planned so long ahead. Also without a good opening you won't reach 2200 unless you started as a child and are a natural born talent.

Exactly. Putting your knight on a good outpost, or sacrificing a pawn to free a long diagonal for your bishop doesn't fall under the category of tactics, but may decide the game nonetheless.

Both positional play and tactical play is required

Chess is 99 percent tactics at 1200 level. By the time you get to 2200 it's 33 percent tactics at best.

I say yes