Can any military aircraft (only fighter jets not the military cargo ones) be stopped using Arresting Gear technique?
In order to engage the usual arresting gear (cables) on an aircraft carrier, 
it helps to have a tail hook.

There are other forms of arresting gear that do not require a tail hook.
Presumably the main limitations on an aircraft using them are the size, weight,
and landing speed of the aircraft.
These devices do not seem to be designed for as frequent use as 
the arresting cables of a carrier.

Followup: As I found out on looking into this further, 
many (most? all?) present-day land-based fighter jets, 
not just Navy or Marines jets, have tail hooks as well. 
However, at least according to this blog entry,
tail hooks of the types of aircraft used by the US Air Force (and some other
air forces) are not designed to work with aircraft carrier arresting cables
but only with land-based systems (which suspend the cables higher than the 
aircraft carrier systems do).

As mentioned in a comment (and in the Wikipedia article on "Arresting gear" linked above), barrier nets can serve as arresting gear.
Various publications (for example the Supplement Alaska, pp. 10&ndash;11,
accessed 22-Jan-2015)
list numerous kinds of gear, including cables designed to engage tail hooks, woven straps designed to be torn by tail hooks (one-time use only!), nets designed to engage struts, nets designed to engage wings, nets combined with cables, and engineered material arresting systems (EMAS) that absorb energy as they are crushed under the wheels of the aircraft. I have not yet found any citations of EMAS being used by military aircraft, but its main limitation of seems to be landing speed rather than aircraft weight or size, as an FAA fact sheet on EMAS dated December 12, 2014 credits these systems with stopping nine aircraft that overran runways in separate incidents, including a Boeing 747, an MD-11, and an Airbus A320.