I'm not sure you understood the Gerald Butler and 300 analogy, the movie is based on Battle of Thermopylae in which 300 Spartans led by King Leonidas prevented a 300,000 strong Persian force from marching into Greece. Similar success was achieved by Pakistani soldier(Northern Light Infantry) welding FIM-92A Stingers against the IAF in Kargil. The NLI neutralized the IAF within its own border by the skillful employment of FIM-92A Stingers in high altitude environment, this was the general conclusion of studies conducted by the several institutes including one conducted by the IAF.
It is widely recognized that light infantry supported by artillery is the preferred high altitude warfare strategy but it took several losses in both aircraft and personnel for the IAF to recognize the futility of its approach in Kargil. Then there is the IAF's poor choice of aircraft, MiG-21, MiG-27 and MI-17 all three were not equipped with flare dispenser the only available counter measure against the Stringer. The IAF was further hampered by incompatibility of communication gear, making coordination difficult and error prone. I could go on and on, but the bottom line is an air force is not assessed by the number and sophistication of the assets it has at its disposal but how these assets are employed in battle to achieve an objective. PAF vs IAF isn't a foregone conclusion simply because the IAF enjoys numerical superiority.