Since the Seattle Times hasn't yet posted my comment to this, I'll put it here:
Austria and Germany both happened to be inhabited by people who spoke German; therefore, they were really the same. Similarly, if a Finnish Hitler wanted to annex, say, Hungary, we ought to let him, out of respect for Finno-Ugric kinship. If language were culture, this would all make sense, but it isn't, so it doesn't.
Hitler's idea of a Greater Germany was the artifact of a rapacious mind - if anything, Germany was a bit of political artifice created out of the scattered remnants of the Holy Roman Empire, and Austria was the "proper" ruler of the German peoples. Of course, to say that Austria ought to have ruled over Germany, or Germany over Austria, or any foreign power over anyone is really to assume that domination rather than self-rule is appropriate. Chamberlain's response to Hitler's "reasonable" demands resulted in the solidification of a machine of conquest and genocide.
My goodness, if you don't know central European history, then you can, you know, not talk about it. Acting as if there is an objectively correct geographical and political division of Europe that pigeon-holes certain people into the "real" Germany is ignorant.