Sure they did. They had their territories with disputed boundaries, just like white folks have.
It was not just like white folks had. They didn't even have property rights, and had nothing in the way of an immigration policy.
They had a say.
No, they didn't have a say in whether or not they would allow us on to the continent.
All they could do was fight us if they didn't like it.
That's not analogous to a country making decisions on their immigration policy.
It's not 'welcome or fight'; the country has the option of legally disallowing it. The natives did not have this option.
They said, "Yes." Later on, when they changed their minds and said, "No,"
They were not a cohesive enough group to qualify their response to the european invasion with a "yes or no".
their lack of might failed to make them right.
That is, they did not have a say.
The Mayflower pilgrims, for one example, were seeking refuge, and it was granted.
Not "granted", just not fought.
That's different from the question of whether or not a country's immigration policy should grant refugee status to certain immigrants.
It's just a completely different question. Analogizing it with the response of native americans to european invation doesn't even begin to cover it.