Argument 2 is correct, the integral diverges because of the second-order poles at $x=B$ and $x=-B$.
Argument 1 is wrong because the integral of $f$ along a small semicircle around this singularities does not converge to zero if the radius goes to zero.
Near $z=B$ is
$$
\begin{align}
f(z) &= \frac{1}{(z-B)^2} \cdot \frac{1}{(z^2+A^2)(z+B)^2} \\
&= \frac{1}{(z-B)^2} \left( \frac{1}{(B^2+A^2)4B^2} + \cdots\right)
\end{align}
$$
and integration over the semicircle $\gamma_r(t) = B + re^{it}$, $0 \le t \le \pi$, gives
$$
\int_{\gamma_r} f(z) \, dz = \frac{2}{r} \cdot \frac{1}{(B^2+A^2)4B^2} + O(1)
$$
and that diverges to $\infty$ for $r \to 0^+$. For the semicircle $\gamma_r'(t) = -B + re^{it}$, $0 \le t \le \pi$ one gets the same asymptotics.
Now let $\Gamma$ be a the contour which goes from $+R$ to $-R$ in a positively oriented “large” semicircle, and then from $-R$ to $+R$ along the real axis, only with $[-B-r, -B+r]$ and $[B-r, B+r]$ replaced by “small” negatively oriented semicircles. Then
$$
\int_\Gamma f(z) \, dz = 2 \pi i \operatorname{Res}(f, iA) = \frac{\pi}{A(B^2-A^2)}
$$
for sufficiently large $R$ and sufficiently small $r$. The contribution of the “large” semicircle with radius $R$ is $O(1/R^5)$, and one gets
$$
\int_{-R}^{-B-r} f(x) \, dx + \int_{-B+r}^{B-r}f(x) \, dx + \int_{B+r}^R f(x) \, dx
= \frac{4}{r} \cdot \frac{1}{(B^2+A^2)4B^2} + O(1) + O(1/R^5)
$$
for $r \to 0^+$ and $R \to +\infty$, which is consistent with the result from argument 2.