Taiwan has symbolic value. The CCP has made "reunification" a major part of its "platform" for decades, and a leader who accomplishes that will go down in history in the pantheon of Chinese leaders alongside Mao. So, a CCP leader seeking glory would attempt unification if he judges that China can win. On the other side, the US is Taiwan's security guarantor, and if the US lets China take Taiwan, the US will lose credibility with its Asian allies. Asian countries wary of China may recalculate the power calculus and feel the need to acquiesce to China. Taiwan is also a symbol of the democratic ideals of China's founding and proof that democracy is compatible with so-called "Asian values." Destroying Taiwan eliminates an ideological threat to the CCP's non-democratic legitimacy.

Strategically, Taiwan is an "unsinkable aircraft carrier" that China wants.

Some of what you're describing has already come to pass with Hong Kong. China is applying the squeeze to Hong Kong that skirts the bounds of definition of the agreement as part of the British handover, ie. one country, two systems[1].

It's fairly easy to see China's future actions with any expanded territories that the rest of the world may allow with eyes downcast.

[1]:https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/One_country,_two_systems

If you think China cares about murdering smart people you need to read up on their history.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cultural_Revolution

If Taiwan looks like it might be a battleground, then I guess the question is what country the elites flee to.

Can you name a single war that was started with logical reasons more than emotional ones?

Plenty of wars have been waged over territorial or economic reasons and realpolitik.

You assume that China would be the initiator of the war.