hmm.. i fear my point in it's entirety was lost on you. ho hum...
1) the comparison was that we would not accept what people are proposing to do the the foxes, were it done on people. what makes it acceptable to be done on an animal - although in this case, a large group of innocent animals?
I believe I am right in saying it was a single fox that did this. Why need we kill all foxes? much the same as a couple of Jews made one man feel bad, so he decided to try and eradicate them all. same difference.
who said we need kill all foxes ,not me ...and you now accept that it was a fox
2) then let's educate the people and not punish the product of their own doing. it's not unlike shooting the messenger, and I'm sure we are all familiar with the saying regarding that.
yes educate people that foxes are not sweet cuddly little pets they are oportunist scavengers ,so we must stop feeding them and stop treating them for illness
3)
the whole direction my initial thread was going in is that we do not know for sure what did this to the children, so we shouldn't become to hasty in becoming judge and jury. as I said, you would sentance a man to prison or death based entirely on one persons story and the result of an event without ensuring you found out the circumstances that actioned the result.
so now you don't think it was a fox 
again you are trying to use human justice on a animal
4) This point is merely to get you to read the last paragraph of my post you quoted above regarding becoming vicous blood-thristy animals. now take a step back, and think about what you are saying, should you agree that a cull is in order here.