Question

What Can I Learn from Studying Games Like the Prisoners’ Dilemma? This is with regard to Strategic Games and Bargaining.

Answer 1

The main take away from the prisoner's dilemma is that "the jointly preferred outcome arises when each chooses its individually worse strategy". It is a dilemma because finding a way to get all parties to arrive at the same preferred outcome can be hard, as doing so requires trust and sacrifice.
For a real-world example (as seen in Thinking Strategically), consider the issue of nuclear deterrence during the Cold War. The US and the Soviet Union have nuclear weapons (i.e., they're the prisoners facing the dilemma). Each side has the same two choices: either keep their nuclear stockpiles (defect) or eliminate their stockpiles (cooperate).

The best thing for each side individually is for the other to choose to get rid of their stockpile, while they themselves maintain theirs for deterrence. This is analogous to one prisoner implicating the other and getting the best possible deal.

However, it would be better for both nations jointly if they both disarmed, because then there would be no threat of mutually assured destruction. But living in a world where your nation has nuclear weapons and your enemy does too, is still better than living in a world where only your enemy has nuclear weapons, so individually it makes no sense (is sub-optimal) for a nation to choose disarmament.