This is a bit of a strange question, because Newton's laws do include internal forces.
However, Newton's third law happens to cancel out their overall effect on a center of mass. But, if you want to understand the motions of the constituent parts of the system, then you do have to understand their internal forces.
So let's assume that we have a collection of particles $\{i\}$ with masses $m_i$ and (vector) positions $x_i$ each feeling external forces $F_i$ and internal forces $V_{ij} = -V_{ji}.$
We usually describe the system using the overall mass $M = \sum_i m_i$ at the center-of-mass position $X = \sum_i \frac{m_i}M x_i.$ Newton's laws say that the EOM for the center-of-mass are (with dots as time-derivatives) $$M \ddot X = \sum_i m_i \ddot x_i = \sum_{i}\left(F_i + \sum_j V_{ij}\right) = \sum_i F_i = F.$$Here $F$ is the "effective force" on the center of mass. In the above we found out that the $V_{ij}$ term disappeared, why? In a little more detail the argument looks like this:
- We know $V_{ij} = -V_{ji}$, this is called “antisymmetry”.
- This means that $V_{ij}+V_{ji}=0$, and since we can add zero to anything without changing it, $$V_{ij} = V_{ij} + k (V_{ij}+V_{ji}) $$ for any k. We choose the average between the equally terms, k = -½ so that $$V_{ij} = {V_{ij} - V_{ji}\over2}.$$
- Then when we calculate $\sum_{ij} V_{ij}$ we expand it out into these two terms, $\left(\sum_{ij} V_{ij} - \sum_{ji} V_{ji}\right)/2.$ In the second term we relabel $i \leftrightarrow j$ simultaneously and we find $\sum_{ij} (V_{ij} - V_{ij})/2 = \sum_{ij} 0 = 0$ directly.
In a paragraph or two I will call this the "antisymmetric cancellation trick."
Similarly we can use the usual work-energy trick and multiply both sides by $\dot X,$ yielding$$
\begin{align}
M\ddot X\cdot \dot X &= F\cdot\dot X\\
\frac d{dt} \left( \frac 12 M \dot X ^2 \right) &= F \cdot \dot X = P,
\end{align}
$$ and then we can define $K=\frac 12 M \dot X ^2$ as "the kinetic energy of the center of mass" and $P$ as "the power of the effective force on the center of mass." Same work-energy trick as for a particle, but now applied to an aggregate of particles.
However there is a bunch of kinetic energy in the system which is not seen in this definition of $K$! The easiest way to think about this is to think of a gyroscope which is spinning but standing still: $K$ as we have defined it is zero, and all of that rotational kinetic energy is being ignored by this picture, because the center of mass isn't moving.
If we instead want the total kinetic energy, then we find that the power exerted on it is $$T = \sum_i\frac 12 m_i \dot x_i^2 = \sum_i \left( F_i \cdot \dot x_i+ \sum_j V_{ij}\cdot \dot x_i \right)$$The $V_{ij}$ terms here do not vanish via the antisymmetric cancellation trick! That is because when you do it, you get $\sum_{ij} V_{ij} \cdot(\dot x_i - \dot x_j) / 2$ after the relabeling, but there is no guarantee that $\dot x_i = \dot x_j.$