I want to know how the American people did established rule of law after the war of independence?

Question

After 21 years of war between the North (Arab) and African Sudanese in the south peace agreement called CPA was reached in 2005. The south has over 200 or more tribes with different dilects (languages). We are currently facing the problem of "tribalism", cattle raiders and "lack of the rule of law".
I feel we in the south Sudan are facing the same problems the people of America faced after their war of independence and their civil war. Iam proud of how the United States of America is today because they were able to established a firm democracy and the rule of law. My organization called "Human Moral Care (HMC) is interested in participating in the work to bring about "rule of law" in the southern Sudan. How can we do it? We want to know how the American people had done to reach such a high level in protecting democracy, human rights and the rule of law in the United States of America, Can we get a humanitarian org. to assist us do it in Sudan.

Answer 1

who knows. just forget.
i even don't know what is america?

Answer 2

I'm not sure that Americans were ever as divided as Sudan is now.

At least not within the United States. Before then there were native tribes, and stability was brought to them by conquering them.

And for the American Civil War, there were disagreements to certain issues, but there were many people that did not really want the war, and it was only split into two major groups. When the south lost, they pretty much accepted that and put their efforts toward reconstruction instead of fighting.

The American people thus pretty much benefit from good human rights laws because those were the beliefs of those who won wars in the past. And we maintain it (as best as we can) by teaching each generation about the importance of freedom.

The unfortunate way of things is that those who win the wars usually decide how things will be within a country. And those who desire to have power and fight the wars are rarely the types of people you would want in power. We got very lucky to have the founding fathers we did, and to have a foundation of education over military might. (although our country is by no means perfect)

The people need to be educated and have a system where they can speak their viewpoints and affect change in a peaceful way, or those with the loudest voices will resort to violence.

I hope that people with your viewpoint find a way to bring peace to your lands without the violence that is the most common tool in the task. If you can do that, then you will be the heros in my eyes (an American).

Answer 3

I am afraid that the solution used in America is not "Politically Correct" and therefore not likely to be used by your organisation
The problem of cattle raiders was solved by capturing and hanging the cattle raiders. This task was done by armed citizens and semi-professional and professional "security" people- like Sheriffs (elected and nominated by local councils) State Sheriffs (nominated by State Governors) and organisations like the Texas Rangers. SFAIK a private detective agency was also used (Pinkerton's if my memory serves me)
IMO the problem can only be resolved with the cooperation of the local people (branding the cattle, watching and reporting of all major human and animal movements),
local government cooperation (cattle brands must be recorded and the number of cattle owned or sold also recorded, with records made public)
with the assistance of communications (news of raids passed to surrounding areas),
technical (light spotter aircraft, ULM, helicopter) to spot the raider groups and
weapons - since all the above is useless unless the capturing party has the firepower needed to subdue (or eliminate) the raiders

It has to be armed citizens, because the army/police are not local guys and could'nt care less about someone's cattle or daughter. Cash in hand (bribe) is better than risking a life in the bush

Tribal questions can also be resolved by using the "federal" structure- separate the local issues from the national issues. Leave the local stuff to the locals (even each county can have it's own rules) and the national issues are centrally settled. Use referendums to settle issues- when the results are backed by armed voters, they carry weight.

Separation of issues works in other places. e.g. not so long ago women could not vote in local canton elections in Switzerland-- but could vote in national elections

Answer 4

The justification given is supposedly that there is a war against terrorists, and that those terorrists are the enemy, regardless of nationality. The problem with this is that what distinguishes an unlawful combatant from a murderer, that is, a criminal to be tried by the proper procedure? Also, there are many other problems with drone strikes- like the amount of innocent civilians that end up dying. Nationality in this case is irrelevant to me. Right and wrong is.