> I can't believe anyone clueful enough to have written the rest of the post added that
I still don't think that was a clueless example.
How to cross international borders: cables, or radio (or people moving their arms with pre-agreed movements, or sending Morse code, but let's say that's not convenient). Forget about cables since they're so easily cut/switched off by any government with any decent control of their borders. That leaves us with radio, which is (just) a bit harder to cut off. But, either you have a PtP wifi link crossing the border from one country to the other, or you have full ad-hoc connectivity, meaning a very dense node network even up to the border, or, you use satellite links. All examples assume that the other side of the link is in a friendly country.
Because of geographic reasons, any city closer than a few miles from the border can't have PtP links. It's also not realistic to think you can go "ad-hoc" all the way through a country's border. That's why I mentioned having satellite uplinks.
You understood that, since you mention you have to rely on an operator covering many countries which are not necessarily so easily shut down by request of a single country (see for instance  for the whole Europe). And yes, you're right it's not suitable for large countries like US, Russia, ..., but they're not the only countries out here.
Maybe your post and mine differ in that you're thinking about a 100% failsafe network, while I'm only looking at how to use existing and available technology to mitigate the risk of a global government "switch".