Support of President Bush's actions in Afghanistan can be seen coming from Americans from all walks of life, and veterans are no exception.

"We are in favor of Bush's decisions because we want our country to be safe," Jerry Johnson said, referring to the position of many war veterans.

The sentiment was seconded by Jerry Lundgren. Both Vietnam veterans, Johnson and Lundgren are active in the community through the DeKalb Veterans of Foreign Wars Post 2287.

Both agreed that they didn't want to see a repeat of the Gulf War, and that they wanted to see bin Laden and Al Queda removed from the global scene.

Ground troops will be a given an order to attain the goals set forth by President Bush, they said.

"There will always be pockets of people that need to be eliminated, and air strikes cannot assure they will be eliminated," Johnson said. "Right now the air strikes are softening up the resistance in order to allow for different kinds of military actions."

It is the view of the vets that without ground troops, bin Laden's network cannot be eliminated.

"This is not about America having a problem with Afghanistan, it's about America having a problem with the terrorist cells within the country," Lundgren said.

Both agreed that this is not going to be strictly a military action, it will be the combination of intelligence, technology and troop efforts. They hope that the people of Afghanistan will realize the differences between the military actions the U.S. has undertaken and actions previous militaries have used in Afghanistan.

"We simply want to get rid of the terrorists, not take over their country," Johnson said.

Both took offense to CNN's terminology of "America's New War," the banner the broadcast company has used to term the strikes. It is likely that the terminology resulted from Bush's statement that the Sept. 11 attacks were "an act of war."

"This is not America's war, this is a global issue that affects not only America, but countries across the world," Lundgren said

We live in an age of global information and a global economy, so what affects us affects everybody, Johnson said.

Both also agreed that they want to see President Bush do whatever it takes to get rid of the terrorist cells and "to get that cancerous cell" without hurting innocent civilians.

Although the events of last month were a tragedy, Johnson said he can see a positive side to the attacks.

"This has unified the U.S. once again behind a cause, which is long overdue," he said.

One of the problems the U.S. will face in showing the people of Afghanistan that the U.S. is actually trying to help liberate the Afghans is the lack of education of the people, especially women, according to Johnson.

"They really don't know what's going on," he said.

The vets praised the fact that the people of the U.S. have the choice to be educated and knowledgeable about the events that affect and surround them.

"Even though we have the freedom to make many choices for ourselves, we still have rules that we live by, these people don't follow any rules," Johnson said. "They say they are carrying out these attacks in the name of their God, but if you read the Koran, there are rules and they have broken them time and time again."

Both agreed that the only way to protect America is to eliminate the terrorist threat through an offensive strike.

"The citizens of the U.S. are not trained to handle terrorist attacks, and when these kinds of attacks occur, they will call on the government to protect them. This is how the government and the armed forces are protecting everyone," Johnson said. "The only way to fight terror is with terror."

Lundgren said that the strikes are not intended to be against a country, but against the terrorists.

"Bin Laden doesn't represent anybody but himself," he said. "I'm not concerned about this becoming a religious war, Muslims are supposed to be a peaceful people. This is simply one man bringing terror to the world."

If one country falls out of the coalition, we must stand our ground and push forward, Johnson said. "It's like Bush said, ‘Either you're with us, or you're against us,'" added Johnson.

Johnson said he doesn't want the U.S. to become complacent and think the problem is solved too early, as this conflict most likely will be an extended one.

Both vets issued strong negative statements regarding the Clinton administration and said they were very glad that Bush was in power with a strong cabinet behind him.

"Clinton was a great politician, and a great speaker, but he was not a leader," Johnson said. "Bush is not a great speaker, but he is a leader."

Anyone who has visited or attended NIU is familiar with the southern portion of Annie Glidden Road.

That part of the road, which begins at Taylor Road and goes to I-88, is more often than not clogged with student traffic either coming to class or heading home for the weekend.

A movement by local residents could result in a lowering of the speed limit from its current limit of 45 m.p.h.

"It's not a healthy situation," said resident Tom Specht, who circulated a petition that was signed by approximately 170 area residents, who supported a change in the speed limit.

"Let's say you had a bunch of kids by the road with a truck barreling down the road at 65 m.p.h. If you had a little brother or sister out there, would you feel comfortable?" Specht asked.

At Monday night's meeting, the City Council ordered city staff to prepare an ordinance that would lower the speed limit on Annie Glidden Road to either 35 or 40 m.p.h. between the viaduct by Lincoln Highway to Bellvue Drive.

"It's a safety issue," 5th Ward Ald. Pat Conboy said. "I don't see any real disadvantage in it. I believe we need to slow down and be a little more careful."

But city engineers are skeptical.

A speed study of South Annie Glidden Road from Route 38 to the tollway took place in August, said assistant city engineer Joel Mauer.

"The speed ranges all over the board from 38 to 48 m.p.h.," Mauer said. "Eighty-five percent of the vehicles, or 85 of 100 cars, were going 45 m.p.h or below. The data will tell you that the acceptable speed is the one we have in place."

A speed study is designed to find out the speeds of traffic at different locations, depending upon such diverse factors as what the prevailing speed of the automobile is, how much development is in the area of study and how many driveways are present along the roadway.

"The speed study did not warrant it (the speed changes) at this time," city manager Jim Connors said.

Conboy disagrees.

"That's not the issue. Even if everyone was going 45 m.p.h., that's too fast," Conboy said.

Connors said that an ordinance prepared by staff should be ready for the next city council meeting on Oct. 22.