Southeast asia + tanks = bad mojo. Study the history. Tanks are white elephants in areas dominated by mountains and rainfall (both are tank kryptonite). Sure, US air power could dominate. They can use the same flightpaths they used in Vietnam, to the same ends. Myanmar is a country where light soldiers, guys with AKs and flipflops, are far more capable than a dozen tanks sinking into the mud.
If the recent Armenia Azerbaijan crisis was anything to go by, in mountainous terrain a drone/artillery combination is quite effective but a relatively new combat style on the scene.
In mountainous terrain with few trees. Drones, and air power generally, become less effective over a dense canopy. The dry bare mountains of Afghanistan was a paradise for drones. Southeast Asia's jungles and river networks won't be.
Saigon and Hanoi are on flat coastal plains too, but you don't decisively win a war by only controlling part of the country, and Myanmar's economy is propped up by gas reserves and other resources in the wild northeast. Myanmar's army is less likely to inspire devotion than North Vietnam's, but can easily be propped up by China if it fancies a proxy war. The likely result of conflict would be everybody being a loser.
Southeast asia + tanks = bad mojo. Study the history. Tanks are white elephants in areas dominated by mountains and rainfall (both are tank kryptonite). Sure, US air power could dominate. They can use the same flightpaths they used in Vietnam, to the same ends. Myanmar is a country where light soldiers, guys with AKs and flipflops, are far more capable than a dozen tanks sinking into the mud.