I was specifically talking about North American natives who haven't had any battles against their occupiers in more than a century. I would argue that continued fighting would have led to their extermination and by ceasing killing they were able to claw back some of their sovereignty and rights.

I understand that in an asymmetric war, the underdogs may need to act immorally to ensure their own survival. At the same time, I find it hard to stomach the intentional targeting of noncombatants.