Pakistan has a concept of good terrorists and bad terrorists. Terrorists against India (JeM, LeT) are good terrorists. They are protected and trained by Pakistan army (e.g. protection given to JeM leader). Good terrorists are sometimes declared dead to avoid international scrutiny while protected clandestinely (Sajid Mir).

Bad terrorists are of course that attack Pakistani Army (e.g. Baloch Liberation Army).

Notable is how Osama was protected by Pakistan army as he was a useful indirect source of income (war on terror)

Indias attack was aimed at the Good Terrorists of Pakistan. The hope is to reduce their capabilities. Not sure how much successful they have been though.

> Notable is how Osama was protected by Pakistan army as he was a useful indirect source of income (war on terror)

Do you have any evidence of any of these claims or are you parroting what you heard someone else say?

Are you instead claiming complete incompetence on part of the Pakistani army? Of course we knew he was there. My fellow Pakistanis really need to realize that we are a pariah state instead of claiming ignorance or victimization.

LET is a state sponsored terrorist organization. It was founded by General Zia as he proudly declaimed that he would "Bleed India with a Thousand Cuts". I suggest reading the books written by Pak Generals to know that they fully believe in investing in militant/terror organizations - it is a firm and unalienable part of their military culture. Such a culture was actually encouraged by the US initially before the 9/11 blow-back.

Geopolitical decisions like this are always ‘least bad’. The Modi gov’t in India is not as strong as it looks, and they couldn’t continue to function if they let such a high profile and obviously religiously motivated terrorist attack go ‘unanswered’.

The water threats are the real leverage, but without some obvious military action they’d be skinned alive by the Hindu hardliners (Hindutvas).