Should the U.S. accept refugees from Syria?

Yes, on a part time visa until their country is safe to go back to

Only families with kids.

Make safe zones in these countries for the people.

Sure, but make safe zones in these countries so these people do not need to come to ours.

yes but they need to become citizens or they should be deported

They should be settled in countries close to Syria that have the same kind of culture and language as them.

Yes, but with reasonable background checks.

Yes but only if they have proof of identity.

Yes, but with circumstances that allow them to become legal citizens or stay on a visa.

Yes, and accept refugees from Ukraine and Russia, as well.

Yes, and accept refugees from Ukraine and Russia.

only accept if they are not going to mean us any harm and must come in the right way

Make safe zones in Syria for these refugees.

Yes, but have a background check only

I don’t understand

No, we should focus on Afghanistan more.

No, I would prefer a permanent immigration ban no matter which country they came from, for the most part. Mexican females and White males make for the next generation - this is the only good kind of interbreed. Mexican males should be sent back.

Make safe zones in Syria for those who want to stay. Allow people that helped us leave if they want to.

No, set up free zones there instead.

No, make safe zones in Syria so we do not have to deal with these people.

No, make safe zones in the country so they don't destroy ours.

No, safe zones should be set up there.

No, make safe zones in their country.

Make safe zones in Syria and so on for those trying to flee. The western world doesn't want these people ruining our societies. Just look at Germany and how these men rape the women in the streets. What does one expect from a disgusting religion.

Make safe zones in these countries instead of allowing so many of them into our western nations.

Yes. Some people need refuge from poverty or war.

I don’t no

Don’t know what this means

Yes, but only the Christian minority which has been persecuted the most.

No, we have already accepted over 10,000 refugees, and should wait before accepting more.

Make safe zones in their own countries. We need to be focusing on the homelessness issue before letting in more people.

U.S. can only take in so many so we could take some but not all.

Yes, but only heterosexual cisgender Christians.

Yes with background checks, and other careful ways of looking into their reason.

No, we should send refugees to closer countries.

No, we should help make safe zones in their country.

background checks are important but i don’t think extensible and continuous checks and monitoring are necessary; if they are clear the first or second time, then surely they’re okay

yes, with intense background check.

Make safe zones in Syria so they don't destroy our western nations

Make safe zones for migrants in their own countries.

No, we have too many people

Yes, but only after extensive background checks only

No, there should be safe zones in their own country so they do not have to leave.

Make safe zones in Syria so they don't come to our country.

There should be safe zones in their own country so they do not have to leave.

No, set up safe zones inside these countries.

No, make safe zones in there own countries.

No, make safe zones in their country so they do not destroy ours.

No, India is currently overpopulated

Set up "safe" zones there so they do not destroy our country.

No, we should instead attempt to find them new homes in allied nations but in the event that we do allow them they must undergo a strict background check

There is no room in America for extra people. There are so many homeless people so if we welcome the Syrians, they won't have a place to stay.

Make safe zones so they don't migrate.

We should have one standard for immigrants. It should focus on the welfare of the US and of US citizens. Whether a potential immigrant is a refugee or not is not the relevant consideration.

I dont mind it

No, give them to Russia

Yes, we should accept refugees in Syria and we have the right to take refugees in jail only if they made any violence against people or society.

Make safe zones in these countries so these people do not need to come to ours.

I don´t know how to answer this

Yes, we should accept refugees from Syria, but we should have background checks without monitoring them.

Yes, as long as they are truly refugees. It is okay to have scrutiny and we should help those who truly need help but be careful to keep individuals who wish to do use harm from coming in through those means.

Help the innocent in other ways.

yes As long as they are not causing harm or dangerous

They are trying to leave Syria. Yes.

On a case-by-case basis, have background checks etc.

No, we should eliminate any opportunity for terrorists to enter the country, but we should work with the U.N to find a solution

Yes, but only after extensive background checks and continuous monitoring to ensure they have no terrorist connections and not more than our fair share. We should also considering helping near by countries that have similar cultures to the refugees, so that they can help take them in.

there is still a pandemic going on

Asylum? Yes. Finance their expenses once they arrive in America? No. We currently have hundreds of thousands of homeless citizens in the USA, so funding foreign nationals seeking refugee status within our borders needs to be addressed by the private sector, not the government.

Only Syrian Christians, Jews, and liberal*, secular, heterosexual and asexual, centrist and rightist, religiously tolerant, and monogamist Muslims

* liberal Muslims as in Muslims who are more open minded about their sons & daughters marrying non-Muslims (e.g. Christians) or even converting to Christianity upon their marriage to their non-Muslim spouse (e.g. the first lady of Argentina who converted to Roman Catholicism from Islam, where she stated in an interview with La Nación newspaper in 2012, that her father is a liberal Muslim who did not object to one of Juliana's sisters marrying a Christian and the other a Jew)

Only Syrian Christians and Jews, and liberal*, secular, heterosexual and asexual, centrist and rightist, religiously tolerant, and monogamist Muslims

* liberal Muslims as in Muslims who are more open minded about their sons & daughters marrying non-Muslims (e.g. Christians) or even converting to Christianity upon their marriage to their non-Muslim spouse (e.g. the first lady of Argentina who converted to Roman Catholicism from Islam, where she stated in an interview with La Nación newspaper in 2012, that her father is a liberal Muslim who did not object to one of Juliana's sisters marrying a Christian and the other a Jew)

Yes, but they should require strict background checks, and there should be a limit of around 5000.

Yes. But no single Muslim men and conduct extensive background checks

No, refugees should go to countries that are closer to their home country. That way if conditions improve in their home country they can return.

Yes, b ut not without a comperehnsive agenda which will promote integration, equity, and equal protections

Yes, if we have done a background check, and depending on why they may be here, they should be accepted.

i honestly wouldnt know

yes, if they go through the process to become an American citizen like other people who have come to America legally

I would say no because in the U.S. there are too many people in the U.S. and jobs would be ostly taken by everyone else.

yes, with extreme background checks

if the are legally here

Only if they go through the proper citizenship process and have extensive back ground checks.

No, we should never accept any refugees -- only proper immigrants

No isis has been defeated so send back all refugees

No, but send aid to countries that are willing to take on more refugees

This is a touchy subject because this could lead to an alliance and alliances can get us dragged into things we don't want to be a part of. I thing the right thing would be to assist them but only with extensive background checks.

Yes, we should accept some refugees from every country in crisis, but it is more important that we make sure these individuals are not harmful radicals and therefor they should be held in neighboring sympathtetic territories until that can be assertained to the best of our ability.

Yes, but only after extensive background checks and intermittent monitoring to ensure they have no terrorist connections

Yes, but only accept a precautionary number of 10,000 refugees once extensive background checks are completed to confirm they have no terrorist connections.

Yes, but they need to come legally

Yes, we should accept 10,000 refugees but only after extensive background checks.

Yes, if we have the resources available to split them all into different communities and monitor them.

we should accept any refugee within reason with background checks

Yes, but only after extensive background checks and intermittent monitoring to ensure they have no terrorist connections.

We should have serious security regulations put into place.

Yes at there own will though

Yes, we should accept 10,000 refugees once extensive background checks are completed to confirm they have no terrorist connections

We should accept refugees from any country where our actions created the refugees. If our country did not, we have no moral obligation to accept refugees, but we should strive to be magnanimous when we are able.

use them in proffestional shooting as targets