No, I mean that the US is not obliged to take them, unlike the first country they come to, or later countries if the previous ones weren’t safe.
A refugee has a right to a safe haven, not a right to travel to and settle in the country of their choice.
Certainly, the US (along with most other countries) should be doing something to help these refugees. But that doesn’t necessarily mean opening borders, no questions asked. A far better option is to properly fund the camps at the borders of Syria, and the figure out who is leaving, why, and where it would be best for them to be. Not the current situation, which varies from a free-for-all to people being shut out a gunpoint, according to the whims of politicians.
Should the US be taking Syrian refugees? No idea. Are there places in the US with established Syrian communities that could cope with additional people, or other communities where they would be both welcome and comfortable? Or would they be better off in one of the stable Middle Eastern or North African countries? If so, there’s no reason for them to come to Europe or the US at all.
It’s something that will lead to more people dying in the backs of trucks, rather than being processed on entry and moved safely and legally to wherever’s appropriate.
This refugee crisis has been building for a long time. Syria, Isis or Isul or whatever the fuck you call them. There has been a refugee crisis going for a long time.
This image has actually had a impact on the political climate in Europe and they are becoming more accepting of refugees.
The government of Hungary is still a bunch of dicks but the people of Hungry are bringing food/water and other supplies to the refugees as they try to walk to Austria. Probably due to this picture.
After this photo was taken, Merkel stated that Germany would take 800,000 of the refugees and basically challenged the rest of the EU to take in more than what they have. Probably due to this picture.