You said in line that I highlighted killing military personnel was not the aim and then you say that aircrafts that were locked on should have been shot at. Their pilots would have landed inside IOK, and maybe 1 or 2 or more would have been killed due to any occurrence of aircraft crash. So the first thing to decide is - was killing military personnel the aim or not ?
Now as you say, IAF crossed IB, or say LOC and then bombed KPK. Then PAF also crossed IB or LOC and bombed IOK, this is fair game, tit for tat response. Abhinandan in his Mig-21 crossed over and was shot down.
Now if PAF had to go in for the kill, lets say, an aim to down IAF aircraft even if they fall inside IOK, then why in the first place lock on ground targets, veer bombs left or right towards vegetation, seconds before impact ?
Why not just unleash 5 x squadron worth aicrafts loaded with bombs and bomb the hell out of Military targets and airfield in IOK and start a war?
This means there was a plan in place.
I mean whats the plan - start a war or give response ?
If any target that is locked has to be taken out then India must have locked on to military targets through SSM (CMs) and Pakistan would have done the same, but locking means that fire order has to be given at all costs ?
Next, it seems that IAF aircrafts that were locked on had probably disengaged from a fight, but the result would have been different had they engaged PAF aircraft in air to air combat, the SU-30 that was caught in the middle, was shot down.