What may be inferred from the means American colonists employed to fight Native Americans and the European reaction to those means?
Incorrect.
[[snippet]]The Americans in this example had a specific goal in mind which led them to act, in the opinion of their European contemporaries, improperly. This does not mean that these Americans would have acted immorally in any situation.
Incorrect.
[[snippet]]The Europeans disapproved of the American colonists' attacks on property altogether; this disapproval stemmed from a moral judgment, and not because the Europeans did things in a different order.
Incorrect.
[[snippet]]The European disapproval of the Americans' actions came from a moral judgment, not one of efficacy.
Incorrect.
[[snippet]]From the indicated sentence, it is possible to infer that the Europeans may have disapproved of the means the colonial army had used to achieve its aims, but not of the aims themselves. For all we know, the Europeans may have approved of the Americans defeating the native Americans, but disapproved of the means they used to do so (i.e. attacking civilians).
Excellent!
[[snippet]]We can infer that American colonists felt that their attacks on noncombatants and property were justified whereas, as the passage states, their European counterparts did not.