European Commission President days Iran shouldn't have nuclear weapons. Israel has right to defend itself

[Nowayyousure]

"European Commission president Ursula von der Leyen said she told Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Sunday that diplomacy was ultimately best on Iran, but stopped short of calling for an immediate ceasefire.

Von der Leyen said that she agreed with Netanyahu in a telephone call that "Iran should not have a nuclear weapon, without any question."

Von der Leyen has previously criticised Israel's actions in Gaza, but said that Iran's non-compliance with the UN nuclear watchdog meant Israel "has the right to defend itself".

"Iran is the principal source of regional instability," she added."

Can you also articulate "why" beyond a one liner?

Israel attacks Iran's Arak nuclear facility, no major damage reported

Israel attacked Iran’s Arak heavy water reactor, a nuclear facility about 155 miles (250 kilometers) southwest of Tehran, according to Iranian state media and the Israeli military.

Two projectiles were fired at the facility around 6 a.m. local time, state-run news agency IRIB said. The facility has not been seriously damaged and there is no radiation, it reported.

An Israeli military official confirmed its fighter jets struck the facility, during a series of overnight raids across the country.

“The attack was carried out against the component intended for producing plutonium, thus preventing its ability to be reused to produce nuclear weapons,” the spokesperson added.

Earlier Thursday, the IDF issued an evacuation warning to residents near the Arak facility, saying: “Your presence in this area puts your life at risk.”

edition.cnn.com/world/live-news/israel-iran-conflict-06-19-25-intl-hnk

From the same source: Some context:

The Arak heavy water reactor was a focus of the 2015 nuclear deal with the US and other powers, because heavy water (or deuterium oxide) can be used to produce plutonium – providing Iran with a second pathway to a potential nuclear bomb, beyond enriched uranium.

Under the deal, Iran was required to redesign Arak into a peaceful research facility which could no longer produce weapons-grade plutonium. However, in the years since and following the US withdrawal, Iran has breached some aspects of the deal and no longer allows UN inspectors to monitor its production or stocks of heavy water.

https://edition.cnn.com/world/live-news/israel-iran-conflict-06-19-25-intl-hnk

This is interesting.

If the attorney general deems Israel's actions in Iran to be unlawful then the UK is restricted in its ability to help to defend Israel or support the United States in any planned attacks on Iran.
Speaking on condition of anonymity, the source said that the attorney general's concerns limit UK involvement in the conflict "unless our personnel are targeted".

https://news.sky.com/story/uk-attorney-general-has-concerns-over-iran-israel-war-13385688

Interestingly targeting a heavy water facility was a major factor in slowing down anyone else getting the bomb last time.

I follow loads of Iranians on twitter who are furious at all the pro-iranian campaigns in the west. They pretty much want to see the fall of the regime and are pretty pissed off that people are acting like they speak for the Iranian people instead of propping up the regime.

have been saying that Israels warnings have been effective as far as their families are concerned but the regime keeps telling people to stay in place every time a warning comes through. Very similar to what Hamas did. Also they moved rocket launchers into residential areas.

First paragraph does not surprise me one bit.

What on earth must they make of them. Maybe they could swap places?