Points out the issues arguing a definitive case either direction because long history and many different places and actions across the time. Touches on disease following displacement and suffering more often than not, and other factors. If you believe in the essential benevolence of the invaders, you might err one side of the historical record (less genocide and more unfortunate lack of immunity). I don't. The argument isn't definitive but it's very persuasive if you believe that people attempting to usurp others' land might not have the indigenous people's rights as their first priority!
I'm a little disturbed that in the face of modern pandemic we could put to one side the murderous intent of our predecessors that most history books are quite persuasive on! There's the potential for back flipping on that to prove a point on what's facing us now, and it doesn't sit comfortably with me.