Why Was Germany's War Guilty?

For a war which no one could truly have claimed to have won, why did it matter who was guilty? At the time of the early 20th century, didn’t each Great Power take part in World War 1? This question of “war guilt,”(1) and who deserved its acceptance, carried great political importance for historians in the postwar years. While some historians may argue the contemporary view- that Germany was the main aggressor and deserves the primary blame, I’d like to argue its counter traditional perspective.
The traditional ideology argues that “the war was a result of a faulty system of international relations,” as well as “a system of alliances dividing Europe into two camps” (3). Furthermore, it could just as easily be said that ‘old diplomacy,’ the
Contemporaries believed this arrangement would keep the military and economic dominance in check amongst the Great Powers. Joll, however, alludes to the system’s inevitable fate, doomed to failure, as security of one’s country and stance amongst the rest still would rank most important. He discusses Bismarck’s intentions of placing the newly unified Germany in more of leading roll. Bismarck is quoted stating, ‘Try to be à trois as long as the world is governed by the unstable equilibrium of five Great Powers.’ (53) Ironically, diplomats believed the balance of power would prevent any aggressors from arising. This clearly did not become the case of outcome. During the July crisis of 1914, the two main alliances were the German-Austrian and the Franco-Russian. The Triple Alliance was later formed once Italy signed its treaty with Germany and Austria-Hungary in 1882 and renewed again in 1912. Britain had also entered alliances with France in 1904 as well as Russia in 1907. It were these three countries along with Japan who came together to form a ‘Quadruple Entente.’ (54) These formed alliances led each country to make their own policies and military plans, when considering the possibility of war, based off the potential confrontations they may