Hmmmm.... Well, in general, I concur with you.
tldr; A bit of ...hm... philosophy?
But, for the sake of a philosophical argument, I would add this;
Laws, in general, are suggestions which, generally, only carry a repercussion if an 'offender' is apprehended. (More lax description: "Laws are for the law abiding.")
So, as the main subject of the thread is US laws and a Federal agency's reach - they can write up a bunch of laws, but the enforcement of those laws is a finicky thing.
The only semi-recent case I know when FBI came and demanded extradition for a couple of non-US citizens for cybercrimes is when a couple of blokes on a Slovenian (small country, central EU, south) Uni poked around US cyber space and left a fat trail. (If I recall, they were stealing credit card numbers, or siphoning money from accounts, of which some were US based.)
Point being, if you don't meddle with Uncle Sam, they got no reason to apply their laws on you. Cyberspace, as fluid as it is, has borders and 'areas of interest'.
I generally give US resources a wide berth, just because the playground is big enough not to need them.
As far the anonymity/privacy thing goes (tapping) - from personal experience I know that every ISP logs traffic, some of them even on the packet level. In some cases law agencies have access to that data.
So 'always wear protection', even if you are just reading the news on the web, a wrong news topic can put cross-hairs on you.
To finish on topic, I still am not convinced that the US could issue a search warrant for any locale they don't control. They could ask the country you reside in to extradite you, but that's a whole other ballpark.