A passive way to deal with the atrocities, in Syria, is to take in more refugees. The US could take in a lot more than it has, but this can still be problematic. Too many refugees can be overwhelming to a society. Europe, not to mention other Middle Eastern countries such as Jordan, has taken in many more refugees than the US and is experiencing some problems. Another term for problems is growing pains.
Here in USA, without even taking in large numbers, many of our prosperous cities are experiencing housing shortages and a rising cost of living. We could reduce the percent of land, in our metro areas, that's locked up into single family residential zones. This could even improve living, tho that's a matter of opinion. Many folks still fight housing density, tho it doesn't have to be a disaster, if planned right.
Another problem with the strategy of taking in refugees is that many of the refugees would actually prefer to live in Syria, if only it was livable. Many of them don't necessarily want to relocate clear around the world away from familiar territory if they could just be able to live in peace in their own homes.
It's hard to know what's the best strategy for solving the problems in Syria. Many are saying that the Syrian situation is being exacerbated by drought related to climate change. There's 7 billion people on this planet and it looks like climate change refugees could become a wave of the future. We have to learn to plan and live differently.