So their story is tragic, indeed, but goes as follows: after war in their country they flee to the nearest safest place due to force majeure and seek refuge, for example in Turkey, where they also have an international legal status as refugees. Then, they don't like it there, for whatever reason, even though they are perfectly safe as refugees, and decide to illegally immigrate and walk or are driven by smugglers for 1700 km across Turkey's land to subsequently cross the sea into Greece, putting in danger their own and their children's lives by bringing more unnecessary treacherous hardship and toil unto themselves, utterly and wholly of their own accord. Meantime the media still calls them euphemistically "refugees" ad infinitum, long after they have chosen to do away with their legal status as refugees given that they immigrate illegally to other counties without being in any immediate danger, in fact even though they do not qualify as "refugees" in any sense of the word once they cross Turkey's border into Greece, neither in the legal sense under all international treaties, nor in the etymological sense; simply because for at least 1700-1900 km of land maybe way more and a stretch of rough sea with the help of an illegal smuggler whom they themselves paid, they illegally immigrate into a country two or ten borders seat from the one they had initially sought refuge into. So the small question is why are the media still all calling them refugees after they reach Greece, when CLEARLY BLATANTLY they are NOT in any sense of the word, legal or etymological or otherwise (compassion is not an excuse for bad journalism of forging skewed opinion shaping public perception). Are you saying that they are running away from dire danger while they are in Turkey, to which they initially sought refuge to, qualifying the use of the term as refugees due to force majeure into Greece? And the big question is: there are over 2.5 billion people with similar or more tragic circumstances. Should they be allowed to immigrate illegally to any country they please? What about Somalian children and people in general? They actually have it worse than Syrians in all respects, plus they don't make demands for halal food. Wanting their life back which was destroyed by war is understandable. But so do another 2.5 billion people around the world with similar or worse circumstances. Should they all be allowed to immigrate illegally into Europe just because the media arbitrarily label them as refugees long after they are no longer refugees nor, in veritable fact, seeking refuge into safety not running away from any danger, perceived or real?