Germany was most responsible for the starting of WW1.

Concluding Arguments/ Rebuttals:Contention 1:"The blank cheque was called blank for a reason. Germany did not advise Austria neither dissuade them from declaring war, they only promised support no matter the resolution"Firstly, you are misunderstanding what the blank cheque meant. It is quite evident that if Germany, being the most industrialized power in Europe at the time, gives another nation full military support based upon any decision, that you would be more persuaded to act in that regard. The Austria-Hungarians were quite knowledgeable of Russian and Balkan alliances, but with the help of the Ottoman Empire and the support from the German Empire, they were quite sure they would succeed. Additionally, one must not forget the current state of Russia and its military. "The Allies did not seriously concern themselves with Russia's military defects, although Ian Hamilton, Britain's military observer with the Japanese, had reported them pitilessly from Manchuria. They were: poor intelligence, disregard of cover, disregard of secrecy and swiftness, lack of dash, lack of initiative,and a lack of good generalship" [1]Contention 2:"Pro has made a misrepresentation of my argument; I had explicitly mentioned that the Blank Cheque was a declaration of Austrian support as seen here..."I can assume my opponent, that there was no misunderstanding of any argument. From an objective standpoint, it is incorrect to state that the Blank Cheque of Germany had no backing. It was full and unconditional support of any major military or political decision that the Austro-Hungarian Empire would ever make. Through indirect means, in this case specifically, Germany helped to cause the World War. Let me explain it to you in detail:When the Austro-Hungarian Archduke Franz Ferdinand and his wife were killed by Serbian nationalist and Pan-Slav supporter Gavrilo Princip, the nation was outraged.Serbia even attested to allowing the nationalist movement to continue. The reason being, was that the previous Serbian monarch had been deposed, and that it was very crucial to the Serbian government to stay in power by supporting nationalist and Pan-Slavic political parties/movements. The intention of Austria-Hungary was not to invade the Serbians. In fact, it took about 6 weeks for the Austro-Hungarians to come up with a punishment to levy upon Serbia. This eventually became a list of grievances that Serbia was to uphold. The Serbian government accepted most, but denied few, mostly which violated the Serbian Constitution, such as pro-Austrian propaganda and expulsion of freedom of press in relation to Austria. The Austrian army barely outnumbered the Serbian army, and the thought of a Russian offensive was too much to bare. It was evident and turned out to be true when the Austrians were scared of Russia's interests in relation to the Black Sea. The "Russian Steamroller", as they called it, wanted warm water ports in the Black Sea, and a group of Austrian puppet regimes in the Balkans, which would turn out to be anti-Russia, was too big of a risk for the Tsarist state to take.Contention 3:"However in all three of his arguments, he did not explicitly explain why this was the case, instead going with the assertion that my arguments were wrong while failing to provide evidence to it. The one time that my opponent did directly address my argument (see “R1” of this round) He instead made a misrepresentation of the argument. Therefore, Pro has failed the Burden of Proof in this regard."This is by no means a rebuttal. Purely stating the structure of my argument, and then providing no historical context in a history debate is by no means a counter argument. It is purely identification of narration.Contention 4 - The War Guilt Clause:As outlined in the Treat of Versailles, which set out a limit on German military, eventual occupation of the Ruhr and the Rhineland, heavy reparations, deposition of the monarchy and Kaiser Wilhelm, as well as a smattering of "guilt" with the intention of providing safe way for France.When France made these demands, many found it unreasonable. However, France, along with many other world powers, including the United States, saw Germany as the aggressor of the war. This allowed for France to punish Germany significantly, and then practically get away with it politically unscathed. (Although Hitler's hatred for France and the Treaty didn't work out too well for the French government and people).Most Important Contention and Conclusive StatementThe biggest mistake of my opponent is the tightly formulated and secretive Alliance system. What my opponent fails to realize is that Austria was not the aggressor of a war against either Britain, Belgium, or France. Austria declared war on Serbia, and Serbia alone. They did so because of a push from Germany. The intention of the Germans was to force Russia to declare war on Austria, in which their alliance system would force a French declaration of war, which would be paired by a German declaration of war on both Russia and Austria. The point of this scheme was for Germany too look like the defenders, in which case it would dissuade Britain from going on the French side in the war. Sub - ContentionWhat my opponent also forgets was the long drafting of a war plan, titled the "Schlieffen Plan". This plan was made for swift victory over the French and eventual victory over the Russians. The rampart militarism and chauvinism of the German monarch led to a strained relationship within many European powers. Sub - Contention 2The Treaty of London declared Belgian neutrality in European military affairs, and was reaffirmed by the British. The invasion of Belgium by the Germans automatically brought in 2 European nations into the war on the Allied Side. The unrestricted naval warfare on British and American cargo and tourist vessels also brought the United States into the war. By definition, Germany brought in more nations on the other side of the war than any other European nation did, therefore it is most responsible for the start of World War I. If it was a war between Serbia, Russia, and Austria-Hungary, with German support, it would not have been a world war. However, Germany brought in the United States, Britain, France, and Belgium on the Allied Side. Conclusion: Firstly, my opponent has ill proved that Germany was least responsible for the start of the World War. Instead, he has shown incorrect assumptions relative to the scope of the conflict. Second, my opponent has failed to properly counter the claims made in my proposal, and has also failed to provide sufficient evidence as to why he is correct. Thirdly, he has argued very little, and shown very little substance in his argument. It is clearly evident that my argument is not lacking of evidence and truth, unlike my opponents. Lastly, my opponent has done very little in writing his own arguments. The majority of his contentions have either been directly copied from a source, or have been claims quoted from my arguments. Vote Pro, as I have properly identified both the causes and the scope of the war, and the reasons as to why Germany was most responsible. Sources:[1]The Long Fuse - Barbara Tuchman[2]http://www.firstworldwar.com...[3]http://www.bbc.com...[4]http://www.telegraph.co.uk...[5]http://www.independent.co.uk...[6]http://www.johndclare.net...[7]http://www.academia.edu...