1. Precisely. The question is indeed as to why they are silently sitting. The answer is, they are not, but they have very few options and every one of those options results in their expanding the conflict, which is precisely playing to India's strengths. It is, as the picture over the past 308 pages and counting would have indicated, a situation which is unenviable. Historically, India has never attacked Pakistan overtly. This time too, India is not attacking Pakistan, merely the terrorists that originate from it's territories. Every attempt at ingression from their side, policy shift dictates that the Pakistani Posts in the region are to be considered as supporters of terrorists and to be dealt with accordingly. The only option, as you rightly pointed out, for them is to come out swinging, and that is precisely what we want.
T
2. Here, I will again reiterate that unlike what the perception here seems to predominate, probably because of the inherent need to feel some kind of satisfaction from 'punishing' a terror supporter, there has been no major shift in the military positions across LC with any kind of capture of enemy territories. Selectively, points that were held by the opposite sides, were either neutralized, occupied or positions adjusted along LC in quite a few places that allowed us to establish arcs of fire that preclude permanent stationing of troops by enemy in the selected areas. This has enabled exploitation of situation to gain tactical advantages. This does not mean that we have not occupied a few points previously held by PA, but merely means that we have simply adjusted our positions with an aim to deny enemy the free passage in the areas we have acted. As most of the places involve contiguous ridges, we have, in short, occupied points along contiguous ridges, in the process eliminating and destroying posts of the enemy and forcing them to vacate entire stretches.