I think, we should take it seriously. God forbid, if the madrasa in Balakot was hit and you have 200 or so children killed. What would have been our response then?
What our policy makers and pdf-ians here need to understand is that "Indians are willing to take calculated risk and keep Pakistan military on its toes. Always under pressure to extract concessions and use this to further various political, diplomatic and strategic agendas. They are encouraged by lack of international condemnation and that is a fact, there wasn't any.
They are imagining themselves in the likes of Israel, USA doing punitive strikes against adversaries at will.
So whenever, their establishment need to achieve some diplomatic or political aim, they will do it again. With something else (place, time and weapon of their choosing) because they know, Pakistan response would be limited and within their calculations.
So we will remain reactionary and would not be able to achieve any of our goal?
In history, go back to 1965.. we escalated halfheartedly, thinking that Indians would not go all out.
What happened? We lost the initiative and still have to fought a war for our defense.
In 1971, we kept watching our encirclement the whole year and in the end suffer the humiliation.
At first, I was not agree to the idea but now I think
@mastaan khan was right. We should have hit harder in February. 2,3 more planes/war trophies, submarine and hitting out the targets (not dropping the load ahead) would have calm down these fucking asses for many years to come. We will have couple of years before Indians trying another misadventure. Their military establishment would have been humiliated by their jingoistic janta. Modi would have lost the election. This recent development in Kashmir would not have happened. It will have given us the time and space to resolve our internal problems like economy etc.