You can still go around it through the Netherlands, but I'd expect the northern border to be fortified as well and the Dutch to be a loyal puppet state who can put up some resistance on their own while being reinforced by the French. Even if the Dutch are pro-German for some reason, it's still a good border, especially before widespread aviation like in WWII.
Geopolitically I don't know how likely Germany would be to go to war without either Russia or Britain (or both, even) on their side.
The Dutch don't need to be German puppets to be hostile; sufficient repression of Flemish communities, political tensions between the two nations during the 19th century, ect. Could easily lead to the Dutch gravitating towards being a German ally; without Belgium ever existing there isent the catalyst that sent the Dutch into armed neutrality policies as in our timeline and they could remain a viable secondary power: enough perhaps to have a seat during the Scramble for Africa for even more tensions. As for a war between Germany and France (Since the OP implies a still successful German unification)... any number of political powder kegs could set it off. If France is dominant enough, maybe even it's a war between France and G.B primarily with Germany being a British ally (both wanting to contain Russia and France)
It was France's proposed border for the Frankfurt proposals and the border with Netherlands until napoleon annexed itWhy would France not get all of Brabant tegen it got the Rhine andere the Meuse as border would make more sense IMO
If France gets this borders soon enough then the ethnic minoritys in those areas (mainly Germans and flamish) should be much of a problem, gust taking it during the revolution should be good enough altho the sooner the better whith land grabs like this whith Germany nationalism soon to be on the rise.
ExactlyBack then "minorities" made up most of the French population. In the 1790s, only 3 million of the 25 million inhabitants spoke French "correctly" according to the Abbé Grégoire's survey. So I don't know if these new French citizens would be much different than most of their countrymen.
There's a BIG difference between speaking a Latin-derived language that is simply a dialect (or closely related proto-language) that is related to "French", versus speaking German or Dutch. For example no one ever calls US Southern dialect speakers a minority for speaking an off-standard English (though they are often ridiculed in media as unintelligent for speaking in such a dialect).Back then "minorities" made up most of the French population. In the 1790s, only 3 million of the 25 million inhabitants spoke French "correctly" according to the Abbé Grégoire's survey. So I don't know if these new French citizens would be much different than most of their countrymen.
French Flemish, Occitan, Breton and Alsacien have largely been gutted. I don't think it's too unlikely for the Flemish and Rhenish regions to be majority Francophone by 1930.There's a BIG difference between speaking a Latin-derived language that is simply a dialect (or closely related proto-language) that is related to "French", versus speaking German or Dutch. For example no one ever calls US Southern dialect speakers a minority for speaking an off-standard English (though they are often ridiculed in media as unintelligent for speaking in such a dialect).
Back then "minorities" made up most of the French population. In the 1790s, only 3 million of the 25 million inhabitants spoke French "correctly" according to the Abbé Grégoire's survey. So I don't know if these new French citizens would be much different than most of their countrymen.
Grégoire's figures were highly underrated, both by the difficulty of languages surveys at the time and in order to further his project of national education. Northern France, speaking french languages, was the most populous region, with 950,000 in the Paris area alone.
He apparently did not count the other langues d'oïl as "correct" French. (Which I can see - when I've heard ch'ti, wallon etc, I don't fully understand them.) But even if we count them as French dialects, still about half of the population did not speak it.
Would France have the resources and the ability to match or exceed Britain's navy with these borders
It would face similar issues as for instance a German Empire, as a great continental power they will also need a substantially more impressive standing army than their British counterpart. This probably mean a somewhat smaller navy, however if they keep up with the naval race enough, the UK might have the bigger Navy, but France and allies/satellites should be able to match them (though not surpass them).
Grégoire's figures were highly underrated, both by the difficulty of languages surveys at the time and in order to further his project of national education. Northern France, speaking french languages, was the most populous region, with 950,000 in the Paris area alone.
Would France have the resources and the ability to match or exceed Britain's navy with these borders
Not really, the Rhine has been used as a border for a long time whith little description to trade so I doubt having gust two nations as having borders there will effect trade much.Won't there be major consequences to strangling Rhine river trade by making it a national border?