My edit didn’t change what I wanted to say.

And I don’t understand your point. Greater China continues to be used today, like it’s been in the last 30 years. Who get to decide it’s relevant or not? UN?

My point is very simple: "Greater Nation" has been used countless times throughout history to describe irredentist movements. Given the political status between the PCR and the ROC, it's very reasonable to think that the term has negative connotations.

GP called the term “pro war”. That’s what I object. I thought it was very clear?

As for “negative connotations”, you are entitled to your opinion, but that isn’t commonly shared, judging from how often it’s being used. I’m sure there are people in Finland who don’t like being called Scandinavian, given their distinct culture and language compared to other Scandinavian countries. That doesn’t mean it is unreasonable for someone to call them that.

If you're referring to Pan-Scandinavism, there was never a serious proposal to conquer Finland. In fact, the opposite is true: Sweden sent soldiers to help Finland during World Wars I and II, making no attempt to annex the country. I have no idea how "Scandinavia" could possibly be compared to the many "Greater Nation" out there. Maybe you should take your own advice and read some history books as your example is fundamentally different.

You are right that was a bad example. I was thinking Nordic, not Scandinavia, but no one in Finland would object to that label.