How could the ideological differences of the Secuirty Council combined with veto powers make decision-making difficult in the Security Council?War 1936-1945
The label in the second box must be wrong because the UN did not get created until after 1945...
The UN Security Council has always been a very weak body because it rarely ever agrees on anything. You can see that today in how most of the Council wants strong sanctions against Iran but the Russians and, especially the Chinese do not.
The way the Council is set up is a big (but necessary) problem. When you have countries with different interests (and, in the Cold War, different ideologies) they will rarely agree on anything important. Because each permanent member has a veto, any of them can stop the others from doing something. So, during the Cold War, the US and USSR generally vetoed anything the other side wanted and the Council was pretty pointless -- it could not make any big decisions.
Decision making by the U.N. Security Council: Because of ideological differences, decisions that would support and be supported by one nation's ideology, would often be dangerous to and not be supported by another nation. On the other hand, the veto power ensures that only decisions are made which enjoy broad agreement amongst the members of the Security Council, thus the veto power, while it might seem in the short term to be a source of contention, would nevertheless be a means of avoiding larger and more serious conflicts. This helps to restrict the U.N. to a role of conflict resolution rather than conflict creation.